3 Additional Plaintiffs Sign On to Lawsuit Claiming 'Mommy Track Is a Dead End' at MoFo
MoFo Chair: "Everything about what's in this complaint goes against the facts of who we are, our values and what we do. ... Lumping us in with generalizations about big law firms is not only unfair, it's unsound."
January 28, 2019 at 03:50 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Three female lawyers who worked at Morrison & Foerster are joining an ongoing lawsuit accusing the firm of gender discrimination, with claims the firm routinely holds back mothers and pregnant women and gives them less pay and promotion opportunities than their male peers.
The three new plaintiffs—proceeding anonymously as Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5 and Jane Doe 6 in an amended complaint filed Jan. 25 by lawyers at Sanford Heisler Sharp—join three others who previously sued the firm in a proposed $100 million class action filed in April 2018.
“Female lawyers who have endured career-damaging discrimination at MoFo continue to come forward,” said Sanford Heisler chair David Sanford, in a prepared statement. “The experiences of the three new plaintiffs echo and amplify those of the original three—the 'mommy track' at MoFo is a dead end.”
|
Click here to read the original complaint
In a phone interview Monday morning, firm chair Larren Nashelsky, said that the firm has investigated the allegations and found them to be untrue. Nashelsky said the complaint is “inconsistent with the facts, and our values, policies and practices.”
All three of the plaintiffs in the initial complaint, filed in April 2018 in San Francisco federal court, worked for the firm in California, where MoFo has offices in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco and Palo Alto. The amended complaint adds two plaintiffs who worked outside California: Jane Doe 5, who lived in Maryland and worked in the firm's Washington, D.C., office, claims she was fired six months after returning from leave following a high-risk pregnancy. Jane Doe 6, an of counsel who lived in New Jersey and worked in the firm's New York office, claims she was repeatedly denied a partnership promotion after taken several maternity leaves.
The other new plaintiff, Jane Doe 4, claims she was informed that she was being terminated less than two months prior to her due date. She claims that she had to sign full release of claims in order to take her leave as planned.
“No one should have to choose between losing her maternity leave and losing her right to fight back in court against discrimination,” said Sanford Heisler's Deborah Marcuse in a statement.
Morrison & Foerster's Nashelsky responded Monday by pointing out that the firm has been included on Working Mother magazine's “Best Law Firms for Women” list for nine times, including every year since 2014.
“ Everything about what's in this complaint goes against the facts of who we are, our values and what we do,” said Nashelsky, saying the firm plans to fight the lawsuit. Attorneys from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher have appeared on the docket for the firm in the case.
“Lumping us in with generalizations about big law firms is not only unfair, it's unsound,” Nashelsky said.
Anna Erickson White, a member of the firm's executive committee based in MoFo's San Francisco office, said that about 50 percent of the firm's newly made partners over the past five years have been women, and a quarter of its promoted lawyers at all levels have worked some sort of reduced-hour schedule. White also said that women make up 40 percent of the firm's board, 20 women serve as practice group chair or co-chair, and that the chair of the firm's compensation committee is a woman.
“It's not something where we just have the policies,” White said. “We actually take a lot of pride in the fact that we do what we set out to do.”
|Read the amended complaint: [falcon-embed src="embed_1"]
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 AllTalking Shop About Faegre Drinker's New Arizona Design Lab with Trial Partner David 'DJ' Gross
How Do You Get Experience Leading an MDL Without Experience Leading an MDL?
Litigation Leaders: Quinn Emanuel's Michael Carlinsky on Training Associates to Think and Act Like Trial Lawyers
Leveling the Playing Field: Insights From Celebrated Women Legal Leaders
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
- 5Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
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