Employment Litigation and Arbitration

Overview

We are strategists, not cookie-cutter litigators. In every litigation we defend, we truly partner with our clients to weigh options and balance risks, with an eye toward cost-effectively achieving the employers’ short- and long-term goals – because employment lawsuits impact every aspect of a business.

The increasingly complex landscape of federal, state and local employment laws can be a minefield for employers. With almost 100 employment attorneys admitted in more than two dozen jurisdictions across the country, our team is prepared to address nearly any employment-related issue. Because our litigators also have extensive experience in counseling businesses, we work with employers to help keep them out of court in the first place. But when an administrative charge or lawsuit is filed, retaining BakerHostetler signals to the other side that you mean business. They know that we will not hesitate to use our litigation experience to convey the strength of your case in order to either effectuate an expedient settlement or defeat them in court.

From the outset, we partner with employers to conduct an early case assessment and determine their goals for litigation, advising them of the risks and rewards of litigation, including the potential benefits of alternative dispute resolution; in fact, several of our lawyers serve as mediators and arbitrators and are familiar with both sides of the table. Our close, and early, consultative approach enables clients to weigh whether and when the costs and risks of litigation – including reputational risk – are worth bearing, even when the case is winnable. Although we try a large number of cases every year, the majority of our cases are won at the summary judgment stage, settled early in a client’s best interests or resolved cost-effectively in alternative dispute resolution.

More »

Our team has a proven record, with more than a dozen successful cases tried to verdict during the past year alone. We are veterans at defending complex multiparty employment disputes, class actions, government suits and individual private-plaintiff actions in state and federal courts and agencies nationwide. When nonemployment claims are included, we also work closely with our colleagues in other BakerHostetler practice groups to provide comprehensive counsel and an integrated approach to support your goals.

How can we help?

With our depth of experience and number of litigators, we likely have seen every issue a plaintiff or agency may raise, and our attorneys are thoroughly proficient in matters involving:

  • Administrative charges in local, state and federal agencies.
  • Alternative dispute resolution (American Arbitration Association, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, mediation).
  • Americans with Disabilities Act Title III (structure and website accessibility).
  • Appellate practice.
  • Background checks and drug testing.
  • Class actions.
  • Discrimination, harassment and retaliation.
  • Employment Retirement Income Security Act and benefit plan litigation.
  • Immigration.
  • Leaves of absence.
  • Pay equity.
  • Unfair competition, restrictive covenants and trade secrets.
  • Wage and hour.
  • Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act and Mini-WARN.
  • Whistleblowing and retaliation.

Select Experience

  • Defended a health plan company in connection with a high‐profile enforcement action filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of a class of former employees accusing the company of religious discrimination and harassment. After a trial of more than three weeks, our team successfully obtained favorable verdicts on the vast majority of the claims.
  • Represented a large national media company in a matter with alleged claims that ran the gamut from a hostile work environment, age discrimination, sex discrimination and pregnancy discrimination to failure-to-promote claims and retaliation. The case was tried over two weeks in federal court. Ultimately, the jury ruled in favor of our client on all the claims of race discrimination – the most significant claims in the lawsuit.
More »

Professionals

Name Title Office Email
Partner Orlando
Partner Washington, D.C.
Partner Columbus
Partner Atlanta
Associate Los Angeles
Associate Chicago
Associate Denver
Associate Houston
Partner Los Angeles
Partner Cleveland
Partner Atlanta
Associate Los Angeles
Partner Columbus
Partner Cleveland
Partner Columbus
Partner Columbus
Partner Los Angeles
Counsel New York
Partner Washington, D.C.
Associate Atlanta
Partner New York
Associate Columbus
Associate Los Angeles
Partner Houston
Partner Washington, D.C.
Associate Columbus
Counsel Atlanta
Associate New York
Partner Columbus
Partner Los Angeles
Partner Atlanta
Partner Columbus
Of Counsel Cincinnati
Partner Cincinnati
Partner Los Angeles
Partner San Francisco
Associate Atlanta
Associate Houston
Partner Washington, D.C.
Counsel Orlando
Labor & Employment Attorney
Labor & Employment Attorney Columbus
Partner Cleveland
Partner Chicago
Partner Cleveland
Partner Columbus
Partner Costa Mesa
Counsel Los Angeles
Counsel Orlando
Partner Cincinnati
Partner Cleveland
Partner Seattle
Partner Orlando
Partner Chicago
Associate Washington, D.C.
Associate Columbus
Associate Los Angeles
Associate Atlanta
Partner Columbus
Associate Atlanta
Partner New York
Partner Los Angeles
Associate Cincinnati
Associate Houston
Associate Los Angeles
Associate Orlando
Partner Denver
Partner Washington, D.C.
Partner Orlando
Partner Los Angeles
Partner Orlando
Partner Houston
Associate Cleveland
Partner Houston
Labor & Employment Attorney
Labor & Employment Attorney Columbus
Partner New York
Associate Cleveland
Of Counsel Houston
Partner Cleveland
Counsel Philadelphia
Associate Atlanta
Partner Cleveland
Labor & Employment Attorney
Labor & Employment Attorney Columbus

Experience

  • Defended a health plan company in connection with a high‐profile enforcement action filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of a class of former employees accusing the company of religious discrimination and harassment. After a trial of more than three weeks, our team successfully obtained favorable verdicts on the vast majority of the claims.
  • Represented a large national media company in a matter with alleged claims that ran the gamut from a hostile work environment, age discrimination, sex discrimination and pregnancy discrimination to failure-to-promote claims and retaliation. The case was tried over two weeks in federal court. Ultimately, the jury ruled in favor of our client on all the claims of race discrimination – the most significant claims in the lawsuit.
  • Obtained a full defense verdict in favor of a Massachusetts employer in federal district court against a former employee who asserted three distinct state law claims, each with three separate subparts, effectively forcing litigation over nine claims. The plaintiff’s claims, which included age discrimination and breach of contract, required the trial testimony of a number of high-level executives. By filing a motion for sanctions relating to the spoliation of evidence, we successfully obtained an adverse jury instruction against the plaintiff for her failure to mitigate her damages.
  • Were retained by an oilfield services company less than 60 days prior to trial in a suit against two former employees for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty for violating their noncompete, nondisclosure and non-solicitation obligations in their employment agreements. After reviewing hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, completing discovery, defending depositions, responding to dispositive motions, preparing pretrial materials and arguing at pretrial proceedings, we settled the matter favorably for our client.
  • Worked successfully with a client and the EEOC to negotiate a settlement in one of the first lawsuits in which the EEOC sought to apply Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination to claims of sexual orientation discrimination. The agreement specifically acknowledged the client’s forward-thinking policies and created an unprecedented partnership between the client and the EEOC to develop a training module on LGBTQ workplace issues that the EEOC could provide to employers throughout the United States.

Recognition

  • Chambers USA
    • Labor & Employment – Nationwide (2021)
    • Labor & Employment ‒ California (2017 to 2021)
    • Labor & Employment ‒ Florida (2007 to 2021)
    • Labor & Employment ‒ Ohio (2007 to 2021)
    • Labor & Employment ‒ Texas (2014 to 2021)
  • The Legal 500 United States
    • Labor and employment – Immigration (2017 to 2021)
    • Labor and employment – Labor and employment disputes (including collective actions): defense (2015 to 2021)
    • Labor and employment – Labor-management relations (2015 to 2021)
    • Labor and employment – Workplace and employment counseling (2021)
  • U.S. News – Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms"
    • Employment Law – Management: National (2011 to 2022); Atlanta (2019 to 2022); Cincinnati (2016 to 2022); Cleveland (2011 to 2022); Columbus (2011 to 2022); Houston (2011 to 2022); Orlando (2011 to 2022); Washington, D.C. (2014 to 2022)
    • Labor Law – Management: National (2012 to 2022); Cincinnati (2020 to 2022); Cleveland (2011 to 2022); Columbus (2011 to 2022); Los Angeles (2017 to 2022); New York (2022); Orlando (2011 to 2022); Washington, D.C. (2017 to 2022)
    • Litigation – Labor & Employment: National (2012 to 2022); Atlanta (2019 to 2022); Cincinnati (2020 to 2022); Cleveland (2012 to 2022); Columbus (2015 to 2022); Houston (2014 to 2022); Los Angeles (2021 and 2022); New York (2019 to 2021); Orlando (2012 to 2022); Washington, D.C. (2015 to 2022)
  • Recognized as one of the top law firms for client service, BakerHostetler was named to the 2020 BTI Client Service 30 for the sixth consecutive year.

Key Contacts

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
Employment Class Action Blog
Smoother Sailing Ahead for PAGA Arbitrability Under Viking River Cruises Decision
By Amy E. Beverlin, Matthew C. Kane, Sylvia J. Kim
June 15, 2022
On June 15, the U.S. Supreme Court finally brought closure to the long-running, unsettled issue of whether California’s prohibition against arbitration agreement waivers of the right to bring representative actions under the California...
Read More ->
Employment Class Action Blog
Supreme Court Resolves Whether an Airline Ramp Supervisor Falls Within the Transportation Worker Exemption of the FAA
By John B. Lewis
June 8, 2022
For years courts have been struggling to determine the proper application of the Section 1 exemption of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). See 9 U.S.C. § 1. Now the U.S. Supreme Court has brought some clarity to the analysis. In Southwest...
Read More ->
Employment Law Spotlight
California Supreme Court Allows Employees to Seek Derivative Penalties for Meal and Rest Break Violations
By Michael S. Chamberlin, Vivian Y. Shen
May 24, 2022
On May 23, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion that will drastically increase the potential exposure for employers facing meal and rest break class actions. The court, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., ruled that...
Read More ->
Employment Class Action Blog
Supreme Court Holds Prejudice Not Required for Waiver of Right to Arbitrate – But Does Little Else
By Gregory V. Mersol
May 23, 2022
In a much-anticipated opinion, the Supreme Court unanimously held this morning that a party claiming waiver of the right to arbitrate need not show prejudice, in Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., Case No. 21-328 (May 23, 2022). While the holding...
Read More ->
Employment Law Spotlight
So Many NY Changes in 2022 – Employers Beware!
By Delores V. Chichi, Fanny A. Ferdman
May 2, 2022
New York employers must be aware of several important changes to employment laws that have already come into effect during 2022, those that have imminent effect (with deadlines just around the corner!), and those that are currently being...
Read More ->