Talk:Jackson Kelly (law firm)

Black lung controversy
This is a discussion about how to reflect the firm's black lung controversy. The initial story of Jackson Kelly's involvement in black lung cases was broken by the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hamby in a 2013 piece for the Center for Public Integrity. Hamby documented the firm's history of withholding key evidence, presenting incomplete or potentially misleading evidence, and conceding the case and avoiding disclosure in cases intended to block coal miners from accessing black lung benefits. These facts are not contested, but it is contested whether the the firm's conduct is legally and morally acceptable. A judge found that Jackson Kelly had conducted fraud on the court, but the decision was later reversed. Nevertheless, the state supreme court suspended the law license of Jackson Kelly attorney Douglas Smoot for violating legal ethics rules in a black lung case.

The controversy has been covered by prominent national and state news outlets including ABC News, The Nation , Quartz , Charleston Gazette-Mail , and West Virginia MetroNews. It has also been covered by professional/trade publications such as the ABA Journal. Such widespread and enduring coverage demonstrates notability for the public's understanding of the firm.

has requested for this to be taken to the talk section to work out how this should be placed in the article. I think that a standalone section makes sense, but I'm open to alternatives such as a "Public perception" section. Happy to discuss. Backtorespect (talk) 16:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)