Our trial lawyers have tried hundreds of cases in the state and federal courts throughout the United States and before the state and federal administrative agencies. We have successfully litigated employment discrimination, retaliation, harassment and wrongful termination claims based on sex, sexual orientation, race, national origin, ethnicity, religion, disability, age, citizenship, family and medical leave status and other statutorily-protected characteristics.
We have also handled numerous wage and hour, breach of contract, severance, employee benefits, non-competition, confidentiality, trade secret, whistleblower, invasion of privacy and defamation claims. Our lawyers have developed a niche for litigating employment class actions and have a group of lawyers who have extensive experience in ERISA and benefits-related litigation.
We recognize that it is often in a client’s best interests to resolve issues before going to trial. Therefore, our approach is to position these cases for early dismissal or settlement. We conduct a thorough initial evaluation of every case prior to the lengthy discovery process and before the parties have become entrenched in their litigation positions. We have successfully resolved cases immediately after and sometimes even before the complaint has been filed. Our team has substantial experience with, and often recommends, mediation, arbitration and other forms of ADR in order to achieve the best outcome. When a case doesn’t result in a settlement, the preliminary evaluation allows us to develop a strategy which often leads to summary judgment.
Our team values collaboration with clients and we fully appreciate our clients’ insight and active participation in litigation strategy. We communicate our strategy and recommendations to our clients throughout each step of the litigation, and with many clients, we provide a detailed written analysis and budget within the first 30 days of the case.
Our team takes a client-oriented approach that recognizes above all the client’s view of a successful outcome. Our experience and knowledge of the claims, judges, jury pools and adversaries give us insight to make the appropriate judgments concerning the risks, costs and likely outcomes. We seek to staff our cases with the right lawyers for each case to avoid unnecessary discovery squabbles, redundant research or other tasks that do not advance the overall outcome of the case.
The following is a sample of claims we have successfully litigated:
- Prevailed at a federal jury trial in a Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state law disability retaliation and wrongful discharge case on behalf of a real estate management and construction company.
- Won a federal jury trial on behalf of our client, a major insurance company, involving failure to promote and pay claims based on race.
- Obtained a defense jury verdict in favor of our foreign-based client in a religious discrimination case filed in federal court in Massachusetts.
- Obtained summary judgment on a state whistle blowing claim on behalf of a Fortune 50 company.
- Obtained summary judgment in a race discrimination and retaliation case brought in federal court by a former executive against a Fortune 100 company.
- Obtained summary judgment, affirmed on appeal, in a federal age discrimination and breach of contract case brought by an executive against a major insurance company.
- Successfully defended an educational services enterprise in a series of race, ethnicity, gender and retaliation trials in the federal courts in New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts following a corporate reduction in force.
- Successfully defended several qui-tam and whistleblower claims brought under the Federal False Claims Act and Sarbanes-Oxley.
- When one of the nation’s leading mortgage companies faced a federal lawsuit alleging reverse discrimination and retaliation, we obtained dismissal of the case after the first day of trial.
- In a pregnancy discrimination case tried before a jury in state court, we demonstrated that the employee’s termination was lawful.