Morrison & Foerster to Get Some, Not All, Plaintiffs' Records From Freshfields, Linklaters in 'Mommy Track' Lawsuit
A federal judge ruled Thursday that Morrison & Foerster could subpoena the international firms for records that could bolster its defense against claims that Morrison & Foerster discriminated against pregnant women and mothers when making decisions about hiring, work assignments and promotions.
April 03, 2020 at 02:00 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge is allowing Morrison & Foerster to get some, but not all, the employment records the firm has requested from two international law firms that also employed two lawyers now suing Morrison & Foerster for alleged discrimination against pregnant women and mothers.
U.S. District Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the Northern District of California ruled Thursday that the firm could subpoena Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Linklaters for records that could bolster the firm's defense against claims that Morrison & Foerster discriminated against pregnant women and mothers when making decisions about hiring, work assignments and promotions.
However, the Northern District of California judge stopped short of granting the firm's request for the entire personnel files for Sherry William, who practiced at Freshfields prior to joining Morrison & Foerster's project finance group in Los Angeles, and Joshua Ashley Klayman, who has since gone on to head the U.S. fintech and blockchain and digital assets practices at Linklaters since leaving Morrison & Foerster's New York office.
Corley found that communications about William's job performance and Freshfield's decisions about which associate class to place her in were relevant since her "performance and demonstrated skills are central to the lawsuit." The judge further found that Klayman's communications to Linklaters about her claims against Morrison & Foerster, her current compensation and benefits, and performance evaluations and disciplinary records in her first year of work at the new firm all had potential relevance to the defense.
"Material is discoverable if it is relevant to a claim or defense and 'need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable,'" wrote Corley citing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
"Plaintiff's boilerplate 'such discovery is not proportional' argument does not satisfy plaintiff's burden to successfully resist this relevant discovery," she wrote.
Representatives of the firm didn't immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
In an email statement Sanford Heisler Sharp chairman David Sanford, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said, "Defense tactics like these are an all-too-common attempt to distract from the heart of the claims at issue."
"We look forward to moving past such distraction into vigorous discovery relevant to the central question of this case: whether Morrison & Foerster—a firm that vigorously markets itself as a top choice for women and parents—has for years engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination and retaliation against female attorneys who are pregnant and have children," Sanford said.
Read more:
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 AllSanta Clara County Superior Court Authorizes Electronic Recording of Proceedings
4 minute readShareholder Activists Poised to Pounce in 2025. Is Your Board Ready?
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Corporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
- 2Goodwin, Polsinelli, Fox Rothschild Find New Phila. Offices
- 3Helping Lawyers Move Away from ‘Grinding’ and Toward a ‘Flow’
- 4How GC-of-Year Sam Khichi Has Helped CVS Barrel Through Challenges
- 5A Website is Not a ‘Place.’ What Took So Long To Get This Right?
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