Law firm files counterclaim in sexual harassment suit
Sexual harassment suits arent unknown to law firms, but when the law firm is the target, it can be an especially challenging casewith lawyer plaintiffs fighting lawyer defendants. And so begins the drama for Faruqi & Faruqi.
April 03, 2013 at 08:15 AM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Sexual harassment suits aren't unknown to law firms, but when the law firm is the target, it can be an especially challenging case—with lawyer plaintiffs fighting lawyer defendants. And so begins the drama for Faruqi & Faruqi.
In March, a former Faruqi associate, Alexandra Marchuk, filed a sexual harassment suit against the firm. She said it allowed a discriminatory work environment and didn't prevent one of its partners, Juan Monteverde, from sexually harassing her.
Yesterday, Faruqi and Monteverde fired back at Marchuk, claiming her “false” allegations are defamatory and have resulted in a “substantial” loss of business to the firm. The firm said in its suit that since Marchuk filed her claims, it has had “difficulty marketing their legal services to public entities, which account for over 50 percent of the firm's business.” It also said that some of its clients have raised concerns over Marchuk's claims, saying her suit may affect their ability to continue to work with Faruqi.
According to Marchuk, the violations against her are nothing less than criminal. She started working with the firm as an associate in September 2011 and was assigned to work directly for Monteverde. Her suit claims the sexual harassment started immediately, and continued over the next four months.
According to the suit, the harassment reached its boiling point on Dec. 15, 2011, when Marchuk says that after the firm's holiday party, Monteverde asked her to walk back to his office with him. There, the suit says, upon entering, “Mr. Monteverde pushed Ms. Marchuk to the floor and quickly, forcefully, and painfully had sex with her. Suffering discomfort and not wanting to continue having sex with him, Ms. Marchuk implored Mr. Monteverde to stop, but he disregarded her pleas and continued having sex with her. After he finished, Ms. Marchuk had left a large bloodstain on Mr. Monteverde's carpet.”
In their countersuit against Marchuk, Faruqi and Monteverde claim that Marchuk and Monteverde had a consensual romantic relationship that was known by others in the firm. The suit says that the two never had intercourse, but that Marchuk was “obsessed” with Monteverde. It also says that Marchuk filed the suit to “extort money from her former employer” and “defame and damage the firm's reputation and business, as well as the reputation of Juan Monteverde.”
Faruqi and Monteverde seek $15 million in defamation damages.
Read more sexual harassment stories on InsideCounsel:
Sexual harassment suits aren't unknown to law firms, but when the law firm is the target, it can be an especially challenging case—with lawyer plaintiffs fighting lawyer defendants. And so begins the drama for
In March, a former Faruqi associate, Alexandra Marchuk, filed a sexual harassment suit against the firm. She said it allowed a discriminatory work environment and didn't prevent one of its partners, Juan Monteverde, from sexually harassing her.
Yesterday, Faruqi and Monteverde fired back at Marchuk, claiming her “false” allegations are defamatory and have resulted in a “substantial” loss of business to the firm. The firm said in its suit that since Marchuk filed her claims, it has had “difficulty marketing their legal services to public entities, which account for over 50 percent of the firm's business.” It also said that some of its clients have raised concerns over Marchuk's claims, saying her suit may affect their ability to continue to work with Faruqi.
According to Marchuk, the violations against her are nothing less than criminal. She started working with the firm as an associate in September 2011 and was assigned to work directly for Monteverde. Her suit claims the sexual harassment started immediately, and continued over the next four months.
According to the suit, the harassment reached its boiling point on Dec. 15, 2011, when Marchuk says that after the firm's holiday party, Monteverde asked her to walk back to his office with him. There, the suit says, upon entering, “Mr. Monteverde pushed Ms. Marchuk to the floor and quickly, forcefully, and painfully had sex with her. Suffering discomfort and not wanting to continue having sex with him, Ms. Marchuk implored Mr. Monteverde to stop, but he disregarded her pleas and continued having sex with her. After he finished, Ms. Marchuk had left a large bloodstain on Mr. Monteverde's carpet.”
In their countersuit against Marchuk, Faruqi and Monteverde claim that Marchuk and Monteverde had a consensual romantic relationship that was known by others in the firm. The suit says that the two never had intercourse, but that Marchuk was “obsessed” with Monteverde. It also says that Marchuk filed the suit to “extort money from her former employer” and “defame and damage the firm's reputation and business, as well as the reputation of Juan Monteverde.”
Faruqi and Monteverde seek $15 million in defamation damages.
Read more sexual harassment stories on InsideCounsel:
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 AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1Arnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
- 2Advising 'Capital-Intensive Spaces' Fuels Corporate Practice Growth For Haynes and Boone
- 3Big Law’s Year—as Told in Commentaries
- 4Pa. Hospital Agrees to $16M Settlement Following High Schooler's Improper Discharge
- 5Connecticut Movers: Year-End Promotions, Hires and an Office Opening
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