Class Action Heroes Honored

Impact Fund Class Action Hall of Fame: 2023 Inductees Announced

Berkeley, 02.24.23 – Seventeen heroes were today inducted into the Impact Fund Class Action Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame recognizes named plaintiffs whose commitment and determination has led to significant advances in economic, environmental, racial, and social justice.

Impact Fund Executive Director Jocelyn Larkin said: “At the heart of every civil rights class action are every day, ordinary, people who put their lives and livelihoods on hold to champion the interests of those who have been discriminated against, denied their rights, and made to feel second-class. Today, we’re grateful to recognize these extraordinary individuals for their bravery and endurance in the face of overwhelming odds.

The 2023 inductees are:

  • Steven Summers and Robin Hall, named plaintiffs in the case Hall v. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Steven and Robin served as class representatives for 1 million California households who were denied emergency allotments under USDA's original guidance. After ten months of litigation, the USDA began providing SNAP households with the lowest incomes (an estimated 12 million people nationally, including more than 1 million Californians) an additional $95 per month in emergency food benefits to help families weather the impact of the COVID pandemic. Steven joined the emergency allotment litigation not just because of his own economic insecurity, but also because of his concern for other SNAP recipients, especially those who turned to SNAP for the first time during the COVID-19 shutdown. If he was having trouble making ends meet, he knew that first time recipients with less experience managing their food budget and cobbling together various emergency resources would be struggling even more. Steven wanted to be part of the effort to ensure the most vulnerable households received critical food benefits they would need until the economy improved. Steven Summers said, With this lawsuit, I think we met The Moment. We did our part to help in a way that had a far-reaching impact. It was one of the most rewarding experiences I have had as an advocate because it helped so many people.” Robin continues to express how honored she felt knowing that her story of food insecurity would exemplify those of so many people like her, and she wanted to be involved in the lawsuit purely to make a difference for low-income people. Robin approached the lawsuit with grace and bravery, recognizing that her story was going to be public. She remained engaged and connected throughout the case, even while she was facing personal challenges related to the pandemic, ranging from securing permanent housing to maintaining her cellphone service. When the case was ultimately settled and the guidance was revised, Robin could not have been happier--not for her own sake, but because the lawsuit had such a tangible and immediate impact.

  • Selena Scola, Gabriel Ramos, and Erin Elder, named plaintiffs in the case Scola v. Facebook, Inc. Selena, Gabriel, and Erin represented a class of over 14,000 content moderators alleging they were denied protection against severe psychological and other injuries resulting from viewing objectionable postings while working on behalf of Facebook through third-party agencies. Moderators are our front-line soldiers in a modern war against online depravity that we all have a stake in winning, and these three individuals fought to protect the rights of thousands by advocating for a remedy to the psychological trauma resulting from constant and unrelenting exposure to screening toxic postings. The Class sought damages and workplace improvements, including mental health screening, treatment, and compensation, and a requirement that Facebook improve working conditions to live up to its own safety standards. In May 2020, the Class reached a ground-breaking settlement with Facebook for $52 million and workplace improvements, which received final Court approval in July 2021. This novel case and settlement have provided essential relief to the Class and paved the way for similar suits against YouTube, Inc. and TikTok, Inc.

  • John Baxley Jr., Danny Spiker, Donna Wells Wright, Heather Reed, Earl Edmondson, and Joshua Hall,named plaintiffs in the case Baxley, et al. v. Douglas. John, Danny, Donna, Heather, Earl, and Joshua bravely became involved with this case while they were incarcerated, at great risk to themselves. They knew at the start of this case that they would not be receiving monetary compensation for the time they spent working to improve medical and mental healthcare in West Virginia’s jails, and that they might be at risk of retaliation for being a part of this case while still incarcerated. Despite this, they dedicated their time and energy to this case to heroically attempt to bring attention to and improve the quality of medical and mental healthcare in these facilities. After selflessly being involved in this case for nearly four years, the settlement - which includes a new medical contract, a higher quality of care, and a two-year implementation and review period in which Mountain State Justice is heavily involved - has been a long-awaited and well-deserved outcome. Mountain State Justice will review whether the healthcare provided in all 10 regional jails meets the new contract requirements, ensuring that people incarcerated in West Virginia receive the healthcare to which they are entitled by law. Mr. Baxley says, “I’m excited about the changes. If someone comes in [to a jail] in the position I was in, they’re actually able to get the help they need.”

  • Kelly Ellis, Heidi Lamar, Holly Pease, and Kelli Wisuri, named plaintiffs in the case Ellis v. Google. Kelly Heidi, Holly, and Kelli championed the claims of approximately 17,000 class members in a case arising out of Google paying women less than men performing substantially similar work and assigning women to lower salary levels than men with similar qualifications and experience. In addition to devoting substantial time and effort, all four named plaintiffs took the risk that they would be blackballed in the tech field by putting their names on the publicly filed docket. The case settled for $118 million in class monetary relief and a three year consent decree during which Google must retain an industrial-organization psychologist and a labor economist to improve their leveling process to ensure that women are paid the same as men performing substantially similar work.

  • Colin Scholl and Lisa Strawn, named plaintiffs in the case Scholl v. Mnuchin. Colin and Lisa courageously fought for the rights of incarcerated people who were denied CARES Act funding of a one-time payment of $1200 authorized by Congress solely on the grounds that the Trump administration did not like that they were incarcerated. At the time the case was filed, Colin was serving time at Salinas Valley State Prison and Lisa had just been paroled from San Quentin to a halfway house, after spending 35 years on three-strikes violations.  At San Quentin, Lisa became an activist for transgender women, while during his time inside Colin got sober and worked on his degrees. He was paroled last year. It is important to know this background to know how far each of them had to travel from to get to a place where they became role models and heroes to others. It's also critical to understand the stakes for them to lead the case, given how dangerous it can be to step out in any way that attracts attention while incarcerated, as guards, administrators, parole officers, fellow prisoners, and outside stakeholders do not like troublemakers or attention-seekers. Despite the fact that the plaintiffs names were out there for all to see, their commitment remained unwavering. As a result of their courage, the Court granted class certification and summary judgment for the class, and over $1.5 billion dollars were paid out to class members. The payments were likely among the largest transfer of funds to a purposefully disenfranchised population ever secured through private class litigation. For many, many, many families, these funds were life-saving. Reflecting on her experience, Ms. Strawn said, “I got involved because as a Transgender person we are represented at times by people that rarely have any contact with us and this was an opportunity for me to be involved as an equal to a system and society that isn’t so accepting.”

The Impact Fund Class Action Hall of Fame was conceived early in 2016 as a way to acknowledge the exceptional courage and sacrifice of lead plaintiffs in civil rights class actions. The Impact Fund, which serves as a support center for civil rights class action litigation, took the lead in bringing the face of class action litigation to the fore.

“We are committed to telling these amazing stories of bravery to help our legislators and the public understand how important the class action tool is for access to justice,” concluded Larkin.

 

ENDS

For more information and photography, contact:

Teddy Basham-Witherington 415.845.1206 / twitherington@impactfund.org

 

About The Impact Fund

The Impact Fund was founded in December 1992 to help advance economic, environmental, racial, and social justice through the courts. Originally envisioned as a purely grantmaking organization, the Impact Fund has made 750 grants totaling $8,754,546. Click here for Grant Criteria and information about Grant Deadlines.  

Since its inception, the Impact Fund has grown to include both advocacy and education in its range of services. Today, the Impact Fund litigates a small number of cases directly, authors amicus briefs, provides a substantial amount of pro-bono consulting, and presents an annual conference for plaintiff-side class action practitioners, a training institute for budding public interest class action practitioners, and numerous seminars and webinars. Click here for the 2022 Annual Report.  

 

www.impactfund.org 

 

What Is A Class Action?

 

A class action is a type of lawsuit in which one or more individuals sue on behalf of a larger group of people to obtain legal remedies like an injunction, a declaration that a law or practice is unconstitutional, or damages.