Ex-Gibbons Associate's Bias Suit Against Firm Sent to Arbitration
A federal judge found that the plaintiff was already "a sophisticated party with six years of experience as an attorney" when she signed an arbitration agreement with the firm.
June 27, 2019 at 01:00 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Legal Intelligencer
A gender bias suit brought by a former Gibbons lawyer against the firm is headed to arbitration.
Jennifer Seme sued Gibbons in February, alleging that she was wrongly fired because she is a woman. On Wednesday, U.S. District Senior Judge John Padova of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted Gibbons' motion to compel arbitration.
Newark-based Gibbons argued that because Seme signed an arbitration agreement, the dispute cannot be litigated in federal court.
Seme, who worked in the firm's Philadelphia office, contended that the arbitration agreement she signed was unconscionable, and therefore invalid. “Defendant now seeks to have its unlawful conduct towards plaintiff hidden by forcing plaintiff to litigate her claims in a private, confidential arbitral process,” Seme's response to the motion said.
But Gibbons countered that she was ”a sophisticated party with six years of experience as an attorney when she signed the arbitration agreement,” so that argument should fail.
The court said Gibbons' arbitration agreement was not unconscionable, even if the firm had greater bargaining power than Seme.
“Plaintiff has a graduate degree in law and, thus, was particularly well-positioned not only to understand the meaning of the arbitration agreement, but also to seek to negotiate its terms if she believed them to be contrary to her interests,” Padova wrote in a 13-page opinion.
The court also denied Seme's request for stay to take discovery on the validity of the arbitration agreement.
Seme alleged in her complaint that she was abruptly fired last year, and that she had been under-compensated compared to her male peers.
“Plaintiff was subjected to a sex-biased pay and promotion system utilized by defendant during her approximately eight years of employment as an associate attorney,” her complaint said. “Despite strong performance throughout her employment, she was paid substantially less than her peers, the majority of whom were male.”
She started working at Gibbons in 2010, when she joined as a lateral associate.
Seme's complaint said she received positive performance appraisals for her work, and was recognized by other organizations as well.
However, Seme alleged that Gibbons awarded male associates origination credit for matters on which they were supervised, while she was not given origination credit for matters on which she had little or no supervision, or when the client specifically referred the matter to her.
“Defendant's male directors often shared their own origination credit with male associates in an effort to assist male associates with business development and their prospects for promotion, while no such effort was made with plaintiffs or other female associates,” the complaint alleged.
Seme also noted that there were no female directors in the Philadelphia office, and only two of the 12 lawyers there during her employment were women.
She alleged that the firm promoted male associates with lesser professional accomplishments to director. But when she asked about being promoted, the complaint said, she was told she “'should be happy' if defendant promoted her to 'of counsel.'” Seme also complained to the firm multiple times about her pay being unequal to that of her peers, the complaint said.
In July 2018, the complaint said, Seme was fired from the firm, but the firm asked her to stay into September. At the end of that July, the firm hired a male associate in Philadelphia, who she was instructed to train, she claimed.
“On or about August 9, 2018, when defendant learned that plaintiff would not be signing a release of all legal claims against defendant, defendant terminated her employment, effective that day,” the complaint said.
Sara Begley of Holland & Knight, one of the lawyers representing Gibbons, said in a statement Wednesday: “Gibbons is pleased that the court granted its motion to compel arbitration and that the procedure to resolve disputes that was agreed to by the parties will be followed.”
Kate Oeltjen of Console Mattiacci Law, who represents Seme, did not respond to a request for comment.
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'I've Worked Until 2 in the Morning': Lawyers Brace for Trump Policy
6 minute readGOP Trifecta in Washington Could Put Litigation Finance Industry Under Pressure
Lowenstein Hires Ex-FTX US General Counsel Ryne Miller to Lead Its Commodities, Derivatives Practice
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Weil Practice Leaders Expected to Leave for Paul Weiss, Latham
- 2Senators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anti-Competitive Practices, Fees
- 3Deal Watch: Gibson Dunn, V&E, Kirkland Lead Big Energy Deals in Another Strong Week in Transactions
- 4Advisory Opinion Offers 'Road Map' for Judges Defending Against Campaign Attacks
- 5Commencement of Child Victims Act at Heart of Federal Question Posed to NY's Top Court
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