White Bird Sues Rival Nonprofit Over Alleged CAHOOTS Materials

White Bird Clinic sued Willamette Valley Crisis Care in Lane County Circuit Court on November 24, 2025, alleging copyright infringement and theft of trade secrets. The complaint says confidential client information, training manuals and other proprietary materials were downloaded minutes before a White Bird employee resigned earlier in November and provided to WVCC, a newer nonprofit formed after White Bird ended CAHOOTS services in Eugene earlier in 2025.

A judge granted a temporary restraining order directing WVCC to avoid associating with the CAHOOTS trademark and to return any White Bird property, including confidential materials. The complaint warned of reputational harm if the association continued, saying “If vendors, donors, volunteers and other local and national community members associate Defendant WVCC with Plaintiff’s services, it will cause incalculable and irreparable damage to Plaintiff’s reputation.”

White Bird said it will seek monetary damages and take steps to determine how much WVCC has earned. The clinic also said protecting client privacy is a priority and that it will proactively inform clients whose data may have been affected. WVCC did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

WVCC has said it intends to provide a similar mobile crisis intervention service and includes multiple former CAHOOTS staff among its leadership. The emergence of the rival nonprofit follows White Bird’s decision to end CAHOOTS, the longstanding Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets program that had provided mobile crisis response in Eugene for years. That departure has been a major focus of local discussion about how to serve people in crisis without overreliance on police.

The lawsuit arrives as the City of Eugene moves to solicit applications for a new peer navigation service intended to fill gaps left by CAHOOTS. WVCC has signaled it plans to compete for available city funding. White Bird stated it will review any request for proposals before deciding whether to apply.

For Lane County residents the case raises immediate questions about continuity of crisis services, who will have access to client records and how the city will vet providers for public contracts. The court action and the city procurement process will shape which organizations deliver mobile crisis and peer navigation services going forward, and how public trust in those services is restored or eroded. The lawsuit is likely to proceed in civil court and could affect timelines for new service agreements as local officials and providers respond to community needs.