Institution | Year | Description | Resolution |
| University of Mississippi | 1968 | Clinical professors on desegregation lawsuit are dismissed under employment policy. | Court rules dismissal unlawful and employment policy is rescinded. |
| University of Connecticut | 1971 | Dean proposes that clinic cases be approved by the dean and faculty. | Policy is rescinded because of American Bar Association Ethics Opinion 1208. |
| University of Arkansas | 1975 | Legislative rider states that no professor can handle or assist in any lawsuit. | Court rules restriction unconstitutional. |
| University of Tennessee | 1977 | Tennessee Valley Authority pressures school to drop clinic lawsuit. | Clinical professor removes case from clinic and handles case on his own. |
| University of Colorado | 1980 | Business interests are critical of clinic advocacy group working out of school. | Dean successfully deflects criticism. |
| University of Oregon | 1980 | University donor criticizes clinic and withholds $250,000 gift. | University president severs ties with outside sponsor. |
| University of Tennessee | 1981 | Attorney general challenges clinic request for attorneys’ fees in suit against the state. | New trustees policy prohibits significant suits against the state. |
| University of Colorado | 1981 | Legislation prohibits law professors from assisting in suit against the government. | Governor vetoes legislation. |
| University of Oregon | 1981 | Timber interests are critical of outside sponsorship of clinic. | University president says clinic must sever ties with outside sponsor. |
| University of Iowa | 1981 | Legislation proposed that would prohibit funds for suits against the state. | Legislation is defeated. |
| University of Connecticut | 1981 | Legislator threatens legislation to restrict criminal clinic. | Legislation is never introduced. |
| University of Idaho | 1982 | Legislation proposed that would prohibit courses that assist in suits against the state. | Legislation passes only one chamber of the legislature. |
| University of Oregon | 1982 | Opponent seeks to depose clinic and dean over funding. | Court says depositions are allowed. |
| University of Oregon | 1983 | Timber interests allege clinic is illegally using public funds for private benefit. | Attorney general says educational goals are a public benefit. |
| University of Oregon | 1986 | Ethics complaint alleges clinic’s selective evidence misled judge. | Ethics board deems complaint without merit. |
| Rutgers University, Newark | 1987 | State claims law prohibits clinic from appearing opposite agency. | Court says there is no violation of conflict-of-interest statute. |
| University of Maryland | 1987 | Governor proposes that clinic funding be contingent on not suing the state. | Policy is withdrawn, but the clinic must notify the state before suing. |
| Northwestern University | 1990 | Attorney for the defense in case pressures university to withdraw and sues clinic attorney. | University rebuffs pressure, and suit against clinic attorney is dismissed. |
| University of Oregon | 1993 | Legislature threatens to defund law school over clinic cases. | Clinic moves off campus and operates as a public-interest law firm. |
| Tulane University | 1993 | Governor threatens to cut state funds over clinic director’s comments. | University president says director has academic freedom. |
| Tulane University | 1993 | Governor asks state supreme court to investigate clinic activities. | Court says there is no reason to exercise oversight. |
| Arizona State University | 1995 | Legislator threatens to cease all funding of clinics. | Rider is adopted that prohibits clinic from participating in prisoner suits against the state. |
| Rutgers University, Newark | 1997 | Opponent in lawsuit challenges clinic’s right to represent citizens against the state. | Court says help is not improper donation of public funds. |
| Tulane University | 1997 | Governor and industry threaten to cease university funding and donations and seek restrictions on clinic cases. | State supreme court imposes limits on clinic representation. |
| Saint Mary’s University (Texas) | 2000 | Law dean is unhappy with clinic’s human-rights case against Mexico. | Dean unilaterally withdraws clinic from case. |
| University of Pittsburgh | 2001 | Legislator threatens to reduce university funding because of forest suit. | Budget for university prohibits use of state funds for environmental clinic. |
| University of Pittsburgh | 2001 | University threatens to cut funding and close clinic over its involvement in highway dispute. | University changes stance and refuses to restrict clinic. |
| University of Denver | 2002 | Alumni attorneys complain after clinic seeks fee award in successful case. | Professor ordered not to seek fees but does; his position is not renewed. |
| University of Houston | 2002 | District attorney refuses to hire students who participated in innocence clinic. | After news reports, district attorney denies he discriminates. |
| University of North Dakota | 2003 | Legislator complains that clinic cannot represent clients against the state. | Attorney general says nothing in state law prevents such suits. |
| University of North Dakota | 2004 | Rejected client claims bias in clinic’s case-selection criteria. | Court says plaintiff is allowed to put on proof of discrimination. |
| Hofstra University | 2006 | Trustee threatens to withhold funds after clinic lawsuit against trustee’s properties. | University president rebuffs attack, citing academic freedom. |
| Rutgers University, Newark | 2008 | Opponent makes public records request for clinic’s internal documents. | Court says public records law does not require access to case information. |
| University of Michigan | 2010 | District attorney lists innocence-clinic students as witnesses for prosecution. | District attorney drops case after witness list is challenged. |
| University of Maryland | 2010 | Legislative rider conditions funding on report of clinic’s cases, expenditures, and funding. | Rider is amended to drop funding conditions and to limit required report. |
| Tulane University | 2010 | Bill introduced to strip funds to universities whose clinics sue the state or seek monetary damages. | Legislation is defeated in committee after public outcry. |
| | | | |
| Adapted and reprinted with permission from Robert R. Kuehn and Bridget M. McCormack, “Lessons from Forty Years of Interference in Law School Clinics,” Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 24, no. 1 (2010). |
