State v. Shack

Facts

The plaintiffs, Terejas and Shack, were employed by SCOPE, a non-profit corporation funded by the Office of Economic Opportunity pursuant to an act of Congress, and Camden Regional Legal Services, another non-profit corporation funded by the Office of Economic Opportunity pursuant to an act of Congress. Terejas’s job was to provide health services to migrant farmworkers, and Shack’s job was to provide legal advice and representation to migrant farmworkers. The defendant, Mr. Tedesco, was a farmer who employed migrant farmworkers, and, as part of their employment, housed them on his land. The plaintiffs and the defendant had developed differences prior to the events of the case. When the plaintiffs arrived together at Mr. Tedesco’s land to see the migrant farmworkers, Mr. Tedesco inquired of their purpose. The plaintiffs informed the defendant that they were each there to see a different migrant farmworker, and the defendant offered to locate both of the men they were looking for. However, the defendant insisted that any legal consultation between Shack and the migrant farmworker must take place in the defendant’s office, in the defendant’s presence. The plaintiffs both declined the defendants offer, informing the defendant that they had a right to see the migrant farmworkers in their living quarters without the defendant’s supervision. The defendant then summoned a State Trooper, and executed a formal complaint charging both plaintiffs with trespass. Lawsuits ensued.