Representative Results

The following is a representative sample of the Firm’s results from various forums on recent matters by practice area:

Employment Law

  • Michael Donovan defended a Fortune 100 company against claims of gender and disability discrimination filed by its former employee at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD).  The MCAD dismissed the discrimination charge in its entirety prior to a public hearing.
  • The Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed the Superior Court's dismissal of race discrimination and other claims that a former employee brought against the Firm's client, a large employer in Massachusetts and elsewhere.  The Appeals Court found that the Superior Court judge had correctly dismissed all claims after the plaintiff's repeated failure to present any viable basis for his claims.
  • Julie Brennan convinced the Massachusetts Appeals Court to affirm the decision of the Superior Court granting summary judgment, on all claims, to her client.  In the case, the plaintiff alleged that certain documents and verbal statements guaranteed him a partnership position in the Firm’s client, a Big Four accounting firm.  After extensive discovery, Julie filed a summary judgment motion with the Superior Court and convinced it to dismiss all of the claims.  The Appeals Court adopted Julie's argument that the plaintiff was not guaranteed a partnership position.  As a result of the decision of the Appeals Court, the Firm's client was able to avoid a trial.
  • Julie Brennan convinced a Superior Court Judge to dismiss a retaliation claim under M.G.L. c. 151B against her client and one of its employees. Julie succeeded in convincing the court that because the plaintiff had failed to pursue the retaliation claim at the MCAD, he was precluded from pursuing the claim in court.  Moreover, Julie was able to convince the Court to dismiss a sexual harassment claim against the employee of her client who had been sued, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to pursue the claim against the employee at the MCAD and, therefore, was barred from doing so in court.
  • Michael Donovan defended several affiliated financial institutions and its office manager in litigation brought by a former second-level manager alleging wrongful termination, breach of contract, defamation, interference with business relationships, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.  The plaintiff filed the dispute in both Oregon state court and FINRA Arbitration.  Michael removed the state court case to federal court and then convinced the federal court to grant his motion to dismiss the action and compel arbitration of all claims notwithstanding that some of the clients were non-signatories to the arbitration agreement.  Michael then convinced the arbitration panel to dismiss all claims against the office manager prior to the merits hearing.  Finally, after a two-week merits hearing, the arbitration panel found in favor of the Firm’s clients on all but one of the remaining claims, and awarded the former employee only three percent of his claimed damages.
  • Brian Lamkin convinced an arbitrator to dismiss, without a hearing, all claims that a former manager brought against a client for stock options the manager claimed he was owed.  The manager alleged that his stock option grant continued for several years after his resignation because he claimed to have “retired” rather than “resigned,” and the option grant contained an extended exercise period in the event of “retirement.”  Brian argued successfully that, as a matter of law, the manager did not meet the operative contractual requirements.  As a result, the arbitrator dismissed the case entirely.  By successfully moving to dismiss at the beginning of the arbitration, Brian not only achieved the desired result, but also saved the client significant expense by avoiding the need for discovery and a hearing.
  • The Firm obtained a Lack of Probable Cause Finding and dismissal from the MCAD in a case brought against one of the Firm’s clients by a former employee claiming discrimination on the basis of his age and disability and failure to accommodate his disability.  The former employee, a help desk employee, had been discharged after repeated complaints from the company's customers that the employee was rude, condescending and unhelpful when responding to customer calls.  The MCAD found that the former employee had presented no evidence of discrimination, and could not establish that he was meeting the client's performance expectations.
  • Julie Brennan and Brian Lamkin obtained a Lack of Probable Cause Finding and dismissal from the MCAD in a case brought against one of the Firm’s clients by a former employee claiming discrimination on the basis of his Middle Eastern origin and religion. The former employee alleged that the employer denied him internet access to a religious website and terminated his employment due to his protected status.  Julie and Brian convinced the MCAD of the lack of merit of the complaint, and the MCAD dismissed the complaint.
  • Michael Donovan represented two insurance companies and an affiliated broker-dealer at a two-week NASD arbitration hearing.  A former agent of the Firm’s clients filed claims of wrongful termination, wrongful withholding of wages, and tortious interference with business relations, claiming $9 million in damages.  At the conclusion of the arbitration hearing, the arbitration panel denied the former agent’s claims in their entirety.
  • The Firm convinced the Massachusetts Appeals Court to affirm summary judgment in favor of its client on an age discrimination claim.  The plaintiff was a long-term employee of the client who was terminated for performance reasons, but claimed she was terminated due to her age.
  • The Firm developed an interactive and comprehensive unlawful harassment training program for a client.  Thereafter, the Firm’s attorneys conducted the training for all management staff for the client, on a nationwide basis.
  • The Firm obtained summary judgment on behalf of a client on claims involving negligent hiring and retention.  The plaintiff alleged that the client had negligently hired and retained a worker who engaged in race discrimination against the plaintiff, a customer. The Firm was able to reaffirm the important legal principle that an employee must have acted within the scope of his employment in order to create liability for his employer.
  • The Firm was successful in obtaining summary judgment for a national insurance company sued by a former employee.  The Firm argued that the claims against the Firm’s client, each of which was based upon or related to a personal injury to the former employee, were barred, as a matter of law, by the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Statute.
  • Michael Donovan convinced the MCAD to issue a Lack of Probable Cause Finding in favor of the Firm’s client on a retaliation claim asserted by its former employee.  The former employee appealed the decision and Michael obtained a denial of the appeal, thereby dismissing the claim.
  • The Firm obtained a No Probable Cause Determination on behalf of one of its clients from the Orlando Office of Human Relations concerning a former employee’s gender and pregnancy discrimination claims.
  • The Firm obtained a No Probable Cause Determination on behalf of one of its clients from the Nevada Equal Rights Commission concerning a former employee’s race discrimination claim.
  • Michael Donovan defended a national retailer in a discrimination action brought by a former employee.  Michael successfully convinced the State of Illinois Department of Human Rights and Human Rights Commission to dismiss the former employee’s claims of age, race and sex discrimination for lack of substantial evidence prior to any hearing.
  • Michael Donovan represented a construction company and three of its managers in a wrongful termination action brought by a former manager in federal court.  On behalf of the individual defendants, Michael obtained a dismissal of all Title VII discrimination claims. On behalf of the company, Michael obtained dismissal of the Title VII retaliation claim and other common law and statutory claims.  Thereafter, Michael pressed in discovery for plaintiff’s medical and psychiatric records and the Court compelled the plaintiff to produce the records.  When the plaintiff failed to do so, Michael convinced the Court to dismiss the action and enter judgment for the Firm’s clients, which included an award of attorneys’ fees to be paid by the plaintiff relating to the client’s expenditures in compelling the records.