Ex-Partner of Plaintiffs Securities Firm Alleges Gender Discrimination in New Suit
Amy Miller, formerly of Levi & Korsinsky, claims she was given smaller bonuses than an associate she supervised.
February 18, 2020 at 06:35 PM
4 minute read
Amy Miller, a former partner at Levi & Korsinsky in New York, sued the plaintiffs securities law firm for discrimination Tuesday, alleging she was underpaid, and ultimately fired, because of the name partners' flawed and antiquated beliefs about working mothers.
Miller, who is now of counsel at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, said Eduard Korsinsky promoted her to partner at the end of 2017 but never followed up on his promise to give her a raise, nor did he ever give her the "commissions" that certain male partners at the firm receive for winning big cases. Her bonuses were on par or lower than what a male associate received, she claimed in a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court.
The firm's managing partners also made sexist remarks, Miller said. In May 2018, Korsinsky complained that it seemed "a third person"—Miller's husband—was driving her compensation negotiations and suggested he speak with her husband directly, the suit alleged. Joseph Levi, the firm's other managing partner, later that year compared Miller unfavorably to another woman partner who he said "knows her place," the lawsuit further alleged.
"Levi repeatedly told female attorneys, when they became mothers, that he believed that they should no longer work as attorneys, and instead should stay home to raise their babies," the suit said.
Miller's suit was filed against the firm and Levi and Korsinsky. They did not immediately return emails seeking comment.
The suit said Miller, an alumnus of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft who worked at Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann and Grant & Eisenhofer, started at Levi & Korsinsky in August 2016. She said she made partner in December 2017 and was designated the head of the derivative department in the firm's New York office in March 2018.
Miller said she had several meetings with Korsinsky in 2018 where he made sexist statements and said he and Levi would have to review her department's profit and loss statements before reaching a decision. When she accused him of making sexist comments, Miller claims Korsinsky became "angry and annoyed" and said she could not see her department's financials.
Miller said as 2018 wore on, she tried to work out her comp details with Svetlana Mayzus, then the human resources director at the firm, but said Korsinsky wouldn't respond to Mayzus' efforts to resolve the problems. Korsinsky retaliated, taking Miller off a major case against Patriot National that was about to settle, and Levi told Miller at the end of 2018 that she would receive a $15,000 bonus, while one of her associates received $30,000, according to Miller's suit.
The suit claims Miller was kept on just long enough in 2019 to represent the firm at two oral arguments and was fired in March. She said she wasn't paid for unused vacation and wasn't given severance.
Samuel Maduegbuna, a partner at Maduegbuna Cooper who represents Miller, said he found his client's story to be "disturbing" and said the potential damages at stake exceed $1 million, based on the commissions and other compensation she was unfairly denied.
Levi & Korsinsky, which lists 24 lawyers on its website, is known for its prolific representation of plaintiffs in securities litigation. It files more securities suits, particularly suits challenging aspects of mergers and acquisitions, than nearly every other securities plaintiffs firm in the U.S.; in an 18-month period analyzed by Lex Machina, only the Securities and Exchange Commission filed more securities suits in federal court.
While several Big Law firms have been accused of sexism and gender-based pay disparities, Miller's action, which accuses her former firm of violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and other federal and state anti-discrimination laws, shows that such allegations aren't limited to the Am Law 200. Law.com and affiliate publications have previously reported on diversity issues faced by the plaintiffs' bar in California and Pennsylvania.
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'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readT14 Sees Black, Hispanic Law Student Representation Decline Following End of Affirmative Action
Law Firms Mentioned
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