Murtha Cullina Defending St. Joseph in Jim Calhoun Sex-Discrimination Suit
A partner and associate from the 102-lawyer firm will defend the suit by former associate athletic director Jacyln Piscitelli, who alleges Calhoun harassed her.
October 11, 2019 at 05:05 PM
4 minute read
Two days after the University of St. Joseph was hit was a lawsuit alleging sex discrimination involving Hall of Fame men's basketball coach Jim Calhoun, the school has retained Murtha Cullina to represent it.
St. Joseph is fighting a suit from former associate athletic director Jaclyn Piscitelli, who named it as the sole defendant in a federal lawsuit Wednesday.
The court docket in Piscitelli v. University of St. Joseph, updated Friday afternoon, shows two Murtha Cullina attorneys representing the university: Partner Patricia Reilly and associate Martha Royston, both from the New Haven office of the 102-lawyer firm.
Defense counsel will face Piscitelli's attorneys: Jacques Parenteau and Magdalena Wiktor of Madsen, Prestley & Parenteau in New London.
The litigation stems from allegations that Calhoun, who worked for 26 years as the head men's basketball coach at the University of Connecticut before joining St. Joseph, made demeaning and belittling comments toward Piscitelli. Calhoun joined the university as head basketball coach in September 2018. Piscitelli was fired the following June.
The lawsuit also claims Calhoun commented on her sexual attractiveness and told her, "Well, you're certainly hot." It seeks compensatory damages, back pay and reinstatement, compensatory damages and punitive damages.
Reached Friday, Calhoun declined to comment.
Here is a look at plaintiff's counsel and the university's attorneys.
Reilly serves as chairwoman of Murtha Cullina's labor and employment practice.
According to the biography on the firm's website, Reilly litigates employment and restrictive covenant cases in state and federal courts. In addition to maintaining a litigation practice, she also advises clients on employment law matters, including sexual harassment and discrimination avoidance, disability and pregnancy accommodations, and wage-and-hour compliance. Reilly also provides training on labor and employment issues, particularly sexual-harassment prevention. She did not respond to a request for comment Friday.
Royston is an associate in Murtha Cullina's litigation department and the firm's labor and employment practice group.
She represents employers in claims of discrimination and retaliation, breach of noncompete and restrictive covenants, and wage-and-hour violations. Royston also counsels on best practices, and helps management and human resource professionals navigate personnel issues, such as employee discipline and leave. She is treasurer of the Connecticut Bar Association's labor and employment section. She did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
Parenteau represents employees in state and federal courts for Madsen Prestley, where he focuses on employment litigation at the trial and appellate levels. He has represented plaintiffs in employment-related claims of wrongful discharge, and discrimination claims related to age, gender, race, sexual harassment and pregnancy. He is a member of the American and Connecticut Trial Lawyers associations, and the Connecticut and National Employment Lawyers associations.
Parenteau declined to comment Friday, beyond saying, "We look forward to vindicating Jaclyn's claim that she had a right to work in a nonhostile environment."
Parenteau's co-counsel Wiktor joined Madsen Prestley in 2010. She earned her law degree in 2010 from the University of Connecticut School of Law. Her online biography notes that during her time in law school, Wiktor was interscholastic director of the Connecticut Moot Court Board, and executive director of the Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal.
Wiktor also held internships with the Connecticut State's Attorney's Office in the Asset Forfeiture Division and on the domestic violence docket in Hartford Superior Court. She did not 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 AllRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
State High Court Adopts Modern Standard for Who Keeps $70K Engagement Ring After Breakup
Trending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
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