Well, That's Awkward: When Partners Sue Their Firms and Stay on Board
Attorneys bringing suit face personal and professional repercussions—not to mention an uncomfortable workplace—but nonetheless feel litigation has a purpose.
August 28, 2018 at 02:53 PM
5 minute read
Most Big Law partners would probably hesitate to file a lawsuit or pursue a dispute in arbitration against their firms. After all, it's likely to present that lawyer with in an unenviable choice: continuing to work alongside fellow partners as the legal claim remains active, or attempting to move elsewhere with the hope that the suit doesn't stain future job prospects.
For those reasons and others, litigating a dispute against one's employer is typically considered a last resort, said Anne Golden, a now-retired name partner at Outten & Golden who specialized in representing executives and other individuals in employment disputes.
“Litigation is a very destructive process,” Golden said, adding that the process is often “more destructive to the employee” than the employer. “The employee has the burden of proof, and if the employee goes public, they'll never work again in many cases.”
Despite the personal and professional repercussions, employees sometimes reach that point of last resort and file suit. In recent years, three women partners at large firms—the now-defunct Sedgwick; Chadbourne & Parke (now part of Norton Rose Fulbright); and Proskauer Rose—opted for litigation against their firms based on allegations that they experienced gender discrimination in pay and business development opportunities.
The women—Traci Ribeiro, formerly of Sedgwick; Kerrie Campbell, formerly of Chadbourne; and Connie Bertram at Proskauer Rose—all stayed at their firms during a period when their suit was pending.
Ribeiro, who launched her suit in the summer of 2016, remained at Sedgwick until at least several weeks after her case was resolved in arbitration in April 2017, before landing in the Chicago office of Foran Glennon Palandech Ponzi & Rudloff.
Campbell, meanwhile, remained at Chadbourne for part of her suit's run but was expelled from the partnership with an April 2017 vote. After settling, Campbell started her own solo practice, KCampbell-Law, and has stayed committed to the gender equality struggle she pursued in the Chadbourne case.
Bertram, who brought her gender bias suit in May 2017 and settled with Proskauer earlier this month, remains at the firm and continues to hold practice leadership roles within the labor and employment department, according to her online firm biography.
Golden said those types of circumstances aren't unique, as it's relatively common for an employee who brings such a claim, whether against a law firm or another kind of employer, to remain at work even as the dispute is pending. In fact, Golden said, it can be advantageous from a legal standpoint if the employee can withstand the pressures and potential mental health toll of staying on the job as the dispute plays out.
“If the employee keeps showing up for work, it's very uncomfortable for the employer, so that's leverage,” she said.
That doesn't mean it's easy or comfortable for the employee. Golden said she typically counseled her individual clients that they may face retaliation from their employer or colleagues.
“The individual has to be aware of that possibility,” she said. “It's a natural human reaction to resent someone who's bringing a complaint against you.”
Ribeiro, Campbell and Bertram didn't comment for this article. But, previously, Ribeiro talked to the ABA Journal about suing Sedgwick while remaining at the firm, reportedly saying, “Should I have gone to another firm and hoped not to expect the same thing? I don't know if that's going to be the case, so why not just fight it?”
Campbell, in previous conversations with ALM, also discussed some of the considerations she kept in mind while pursuing her case. In April, she said that she ultimately settled her dispute with Chadbourne after weighing several factors, including that she wasn't the only one with an interest in how the case turned out.
Campbell's suit was brought as a proposed class action, with former Chadbourne partners Mary Yelenick and Jaroslawa Zelinsky Johnson also serving as named plaintiffs. They all had to consider the reputational, family and other impacts of a protracted court battle, Campbell said in April.
“I felt very much that there was a purpose for doing this that was greater than myself,” Campbell said. “That kind of perspective—I had to tap into that. The fighter wanted to keep fighting.”
Also in April, Campbell told The American Lawyer's Careerist columnist Vivia Chen that once she filed suit against Chadbourne, “almost no one” in her local professional world acknowledged the case, or the broader gender inequality issues it brought attention to.
Still, it appears Campbell believed the sense of isolation was worth it.
“I believe anyone leading the way for change must be willing to withstand solitariness,” Campbell said in April. “I went into the litigation with eyes open and I had tremendous support from family.”
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 AllHow Senior Litigators Are Dealing With the 'Biden Effect'
Even With New Business Courts, Texas Is a Long Way from Taking Delaware's Corporate Law Mantle
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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