Jones Day: Parental Leave Lawsuit by Married Ex-Associates 'Meritless'
In a motion to dismiss, the firm said its policies are legal and it fired one of the plaintiffs for "poor judgment and immaturity," not out of bias.
September 27, 2019 at 06:53 PM
3 minute read
Jones Day on Friday shot back at allegations that it discriminates against men, arguing that its parental leave policies for birth parents and adoptive parents are "sex-neutral in every respect."
In a 37-page motion to dismiss filed Friday in D.C. federal court, attorneys for Jones Day said the claims raised by Mark Savignac and Julia Sheketoff, a married couple who worked at the firm as associates, are "legally meritless."
"The only disparate treatment here is between primary and secondary caregivers—regardless of gender. That does not (and is not alleged to) violate the law," Jones Day's lawyers wrote.
Savignac and Sheketoff alleged the firm's leave policy—in which birth mothers are offered eight weeks of paid disability leave—is discriminatory. But that's because "fathers are not similarly situated to postpartum mothers," the firm argued.
"If a father suffered a heart attack while in the delivery room, he too would be entitled to disability leave," Jones Day continued.
Savignac and Sheketoff complained to the firm about its parental leave policies in 2018 before their son was born. Sheketoff left Jones Day in August 2018. Savignac, described by Jones Day in its filing as a "supposedly sophisticated attorney," was fired five months later, after he sent another email demanding 18 weeks of paid leave or else he would sue and fight the issue both in court and the "court of public opinion."
Jones Day in its motion described Savignac's email as a threat and thus grounds for termination. It was not, the firm's attorneys argued, a "protected activity" because his complaints were not about unlawful activity or discrimination.
"Actually, Jones Day fired him for the poor judgment and immaturity reflected by his extortionate threat to harm the firm in the 'court of public opinion' unless it acceded to his unreasoned demand for the same disability leave afforded to women who give birth," the firm's lawyers wrote.
Jones Day denied the other claims raised by the couple, who met when clerking for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The firm described the two as "undoubtedly, clever and creative lawyers with aspirational views of the law," and suggested that the best way they can achieve their goals for parental leave is to pursue legislative action.
The lawsuit from Savignac and Sheketoff comes as Jones Day fights off a proposed $200 million class action that was filed by former associates who allege that the firm systemically discriminates against women lawyers.
Savignac and Sheketoff are representing themselves in the case. Savignac did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
|Read More
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Further Investment in Power' Will Drive Big Law Business—But What About Clean Energy Projects?
6 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250