 |
National Bank Wage and Hour
We defeated class certification of a case alleging all in store branch managers were misclassified and successfully resolved the named plaintiffs’ individual claim for nuisance value on the eve of trial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anheuser-Busch v. Teamsters Local 744
Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.
We represented Anheuser-Busch Cos., Inc. in a labor arbitration involving the Teamsters. Our attorneys successfully overturned an arbitrator’s ruling that barred Anheuser-Busch from paying certain employees in accordance with labor contract terms favorable to our client. The district court ruled in favor of the Teamsters, but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling in favor of our client. The United States Supreme Court denied cert.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Caterpillar Inc. v. Lyons, et al.
Caterpillar Inc. Corp. Office
We represented Caterpillar in connection with a complaint it filed in the Central District of Illinois seeking a declaration that the Illinois Employment of Strikebreakers Act (ESA) and its recent amendments violated our client’s rights under the NLRA and was preempted by federal labor law. The ESA was amended in July 2003 to further prevent employers from contracting with day or temporary labor service agencies to provide replacement workers during a work stoppage. The District Court ruled that the ESA was preempted by federal labor law and enjoined the defendant state’s attorneys from enforcing the Act against Caterpillar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Re Caterpillar Inc.
Caterpillar Inc. Corp. Office
Winston & Strawn represented Caterpillar in all litigation that arose in connection with the eight-year labor dispute between Caterpillar and the United Auto Workers. Beginning with an unsuccessful class action breach of contract claim filed on behalf of all striking UAW members who returned to work in the aftermath of the UAW’s failed 1991-1992 strike, the firm handled litigation in every conceivable federal, state, and administrative forum, including the United States Supreme Court. In all, 1,000 charges were filed before the National Labor Relations Board resulting in the issuance of 400 complaints and over five years of litigation before four separate administrative law judges. Winston & Strawn’s attorneys also advised Caterpillar in it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local 179, IBT v. TSC Enterprises, Inc.
National Bank Of Canada
In a case of first impression regarding what constituted an unlawful rolling notice, we defended TSC in a class action WARN claim that was filed in connection with TSC’s closure of a steel mill it purchased out of bankruptcy. The court granted summary judgment, finding that all notices issued by TSC complied with federal law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senzarin v. Abbott Severance Pay Plan for Employees of Kos Pharmaceuticals
Abbott Laboratories
Our attorneys secured a victory for Abbott Laboratories in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which upheld a ruling that an Abbott pharmaceutical sales representative was ineligible for severance benefits. The plaintiff sought the benefits after she quit on "good reason" because she alleged she was forced to travel more than 50 miles from her home for work. But Abbott, using a "straight-line measurement" analysis to measure distance via a weighted average, found the pharmaceutical sales rep actually travelled under 50 miles. The court ruled that it was not unreasonable for Abbott to use its method to calculate her distance and that Abbott did not act arbitrarily when denying the benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Citadel, LLC v. Pu
Citadel LLC
Winston & Strawn represented Citadel LLC in investigating and prosecuting the alleged misappropriation of trade secrets by Yihao Ben Pu, an employee in Citadel’s high frequency trading business. Working closely with computer forensics experts, Winston & Strawn developed significant evidence of a widespread scheme by the defendant to misappropriate trade secret information concerning Citadel’s operations – apparently for use by the defendant either on behalf of another employer or in his own proprietary trading enterprise. We successfully obtained both a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the defendant, who was ultimately indicted by the United States for criminal theft of trade secrets among other offenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPIU v. Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation
We represented Jefferson Smurfit Corp. (JSC) in a class action filed by various unions and more than 3,500 retirees under ERISA and Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act challenging changes to JSC’s retiree medical benefits plan and the portion of the cost charged to retirees. The plaintiffs claimed oral and written labor contractual promises to provide lifetime benefits, as well as fraud and misrepresentation regarding the costs of the plan. After four years of massive discovery and many hard-fought pretrial battles, Winston & Strawn obtained judgment on all points for JSC on the eve of trial, saving our client more than $200 million in liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Petersen, et al. v Marsh & McLennan, Mercer Consulting, et al.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
Rebecca Petersen brought the suit on behalf of herself and thousands of current and former employees of Mercer (U.S.) Inc. claiming that Mercer had misclassified her and the other purported class members as exempt from the overtime compensation. Winston & Strawn defeated the plaintiff’s initial efforts to conditionally certify a class of more then 1,700 current and former employees, forcing the plaintiff to seek representation of a significantly smaller class. The defeat of the plaintiff’s conditional certification efforts led directly to a favorable settlement for the client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sewell and Diangson v. Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. and Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc.
Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc.
Renee Sewell commenced a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against Winston clients Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. and Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc. concerning alleged violations of the FLSA with respect to alleged unpaid overtime violations. The plaintiff filed suit on behalf of herself and all allegedly similarly situated current and former employees of the company. The plaintiff also claimed overtime pay violations under New Jersey and New York state laws on behalf of a class of herself and the purported class. Following months of vigorous litigation, Winston positioned this matter for a very favorable position for the client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Applied Card System Wage & Hour Litigation
Applied Card Systems Inc.
We represented Applied Card Systems in an overtime misclassification case in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Florida before Judge Kenneth Marra. The plaintiffs allege that a group of ACS supervisors were improperly classified as exempt from the FLSA's overtime pay requirements and sought certification of a class of all supervisors nationwide. However, Winston & Strawn defeated the plaintiff's motion and the class was limited to supervisors at ACS's south Florida location. The case was subsequently settled on terms very favorable to our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Morrison v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
The plaintiff's claim for allegedly owing benefits under the client's life insurance plan was denied as untimely. The plaintiff relied on alleged discrepancies in the plan document and SPD to argue a different limitations period should apply. We obtained a dismissal of all of plaintiff's claims in the District Court. The plaintiff appealed to the Sixth Circuit and we argued and won all aspects of the appeal for our client. Adopting almost entirely the arguments set forth in our oral argument and briefs regarding the standard for resolving conflicts between SPD and Plan provisions, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the District Court's grant of summary judgment for our client on all claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kinsella v. American Airlines
American Airlines
Winston & Strawn recently won summary judgment on behalf of American Airlines, Inc. on Dawn Kinsella's claim that American violated the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) when it terminated her employment. American discharged Kinsella because she abused her sick time by falsely calling in sick on several days. Kinsella argued that she called in FMLA time on the days in question and was retaliated against for doing so. In granting summary judgment for American, Judge Virginia Kendall of the Northern District of Illinois held that Kinsella did not present any credible evidence that she actually called in FMLA on the days in question and, therefore, failed to establish that she engaged in statutorily protected activity. The court also ruled
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Re AIG ERISA Litigation
Howard I. Smith
Winston & Strawn represents Howard I. Smith, the former Chief Financial Officer of American International Group, Inc. (AIG), in several pending civil litigation matters arising out of the alleged insurance industry-wide bid-rigging and undisclosed contingent commissions paid to insurance brokers, AIG's 2005 restatement of its financial statements for the years 2000 through 2004, and other matters. The firm has secured favorable settlements of certain of the matters on behalf of our client, including a federal consolidated ERISA action brought against AIG and certain of its current and former executives for breach of fiduciary duty for failure to properly manage AIG's ERISA plans. Our client made no payment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foodservice Distribution Company Wage and Hour Litigation
Winston successfully argued that because of the unique nature of the truck drivers at issue and the lack of records indicating a meal period was taken was insufficient to certify a class when substantial numbers of putative class members declared they were able to take meal and rest periods as needed, and were aware of the overall company policy encouraging drivers to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entertainment Company Wage and Hour Litigation
Winston & Strawn is currently representing the largest live entertainment company in the world in a wage and hour class action in California including allegations of meal and rest break violations, failure to reimburse business expenses, and off-the-clock work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cruise and Event Company Wage and Hour Litigation
Winston & Strawn is currently representing a leading provider of on-board entertainment in a wage and hour class action in California that includes allegations of failure to pay overtime and expense reimbursement violations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nationwide Restaurant Chain Wage & Hour Litigation
Winston & Strawn is currently representing a nationwide restaurant chain in a California wage and hour class action including allegations of meal and rest period violations, off-the-clock work, expense reimbursement violations, and WARN violations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Pest Control Company Wage & Hour Class Actions
Winston & Strawn won a significant victory for a national pest control company. A federal court agreed to deny a former employee's bid for class certification of an unpaid overtime claim on behalf of all current and former employees who both inspect for termite infestation and sell termite control services. The court concluded that the individual inquiries associated with determining whether all of the employees were properly classified as exempt from overtime predominated over any common issues that might be decided on a class basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin R. Ryan v. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Underwriters Laboratories (UL) in a lawsuit brought by a former employee of a company acquired by UL claiming wrongful termination and violation of whistleblower protection laws. The plaintiff was terminated in 2003 after he wrote a letter to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the governmental entity in charge of the official investigation into the terror attacks of September 11, and sent this letter from his UL e-mail account. In the letter, Ryan opined that the World Trade Towers had been brought down by explosives intentionally placed at the base of the buildings. He also sent a copy of the letter to a group dedicated to proving the U.S. government had blown up the towers. The letter,
|
|
|
|
|
|
RLJCS Enterprises, Inc. et al. v. Professional Benefit Trust, Inc. et al.
Professional Benefit Trust, Inc.
Winston & Strawn secured a summary judgment decision, which was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, for the Professional Benefit Trust Multiple Employer Welfare Benefit Plan and Trust (the “Trust”) in a unique case involving a welfare benefit plan that was designed and operated to allow employers to pre-fund certain benefits on a tax-deferred basis pursuant to IRC § 419A(f)(6). The plaintiffs, who contracted with our client for death benefits, alleged 16 counts including violations of civil RICO, ERISA, breach of contract and fiduciary duty, fraud, conversion, civil conspiracy, and other state law claims. As a means of reinsuring itself for payment of the death benefits, the Trust purchased life insurance from var
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony Flynn v. Satellier, Inc.
Satellier
Winston & Strawn represented Satellier against a former employee, Anthony Flynn. Mr. Flynn alleged Satellier had terminated his employment without cause and he was owed severance pay and other benefits. Satellier contended that Mr. Flynn resigned his employment. After a three day hearing, the Arbitrator issued an opinion and award concluding that Flynn had resigned and was not entitled to any severance under his employment agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USAirways Pension Litigation
AON Corporation
We represented the named fiduciary of the USAirways retirement plans against allegations that the plan's investments in company stock violated fiduciary duties under ERISA. We obtained a dismissal of all claims against our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reddy v. MedQuist
MedQuist Inc.
We obtained summary judgment for MedQuist in a RICO lawsuit, seeking billions in damages, filed by a former employee in the Northern District of New Jersey. The lawsuit followed the company's announcement of findings of an independent review of customer billings and its de-listing from the NASDAQ stock exchange in 2004. The complaint was initially filed against MedQuist, its majority shareholder, Phillips, and certain current and former directors, and alleged numerous counts, most of which were dismissed at the pleading stage. The court then granted summary judgment on the remaining claims in favor of the company. Subsequently, the plaintiff tried to file a new action in the Southern District of California. However, the California district
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marsha Bartel v. NBC Universal Inc.
NBC Universal
On behalf of NBC, we successfully defended the dismissal of a suit for breach of an employment contract involving a producer who was asked to work on the Dateline NBC program “To Catch A Predator.” We argued against the expansion of a state law exception to at-will employment based on the employee’s reporting of alleged ethical misconduct. The Seventh Circuit accepted our position and ruled in our favor. The matter closed in September 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawrence Livermore Trade Secret Litigation
Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC
Our attorneys scored a major trial victory for clients Lawrence Livermore National Security and The Regents of the University of California. The case involved serious, but ultimately unproven, allegations of theft and disclosure of proprietary information relating to technology developed for achieving nuclear fusion ignition. Scientists at the National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are working on inertial confinement fusion to achieve nuclear fusion ignition. By pointing the world’s most powerful laser at a 2mm capsule filled with hydrogen fuel, scientists hope to fuse hydrogen atoms together, creating a fusion burn like that found in the sun and stars. In 2004, the plaintiffs made presentations under a non-dis
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swenson Process v. Balcke Durr
Swenson Process Equipment Inc.
We successfully represented Swenson Process Equipment in a trial relating to breach of contract and infringement of trade secrets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Casanova v. American Airlines, Inc.
American Airlines
Winston & Strawn scored a significant victory for American Airlines in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, convincing the court to overturn a $1.1 million jury verdict in favor of a former baggage handler who brought a retaliatory discharge claim under Illinois law. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that the plaintiff’s claim never should have reached the jury. The undisputed facts showed that Casanova was fired for lying and insubordination during a union-sanctioned investigatory hearing, not for exercising workers’ compensation rights. The court explained that Illinois law does not prevent employers from investigating and questioning employees about injuries. And even if such investigations are unwarranted (
|
|
|
|
|
|
Montgomery v. American Airlines, Inc.
American Airlines
The plaintiff sued his employer, American Airlines, Inc., alleging two civil rights violations relating to his race. First, he claimed that American allowed a hostile work environment to persist in a maintenance shop to which he was briefly assigned as a probationary employee. Second, he claimed that his demotion at the end of his probationary period was motivated by racial discrimination. Specifically, he alleged that he was required to take and pass a qualifying exam that other non-African American employees were not required to take. After discovery, American moved for summary judgment. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of American on all counts. The plaintiff timely appealed, and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals a
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comrie v. IPSCO Inc.
SSAB Enterprises, LLC
Winston & Strawn successfully represented SSAB Enterprises LLC in Comrie v. IPSCO Inc. SSAB is a Swedish-based steel manufacturer, who bought IPSCO’s U.S. assets in 2007. In this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld IPSCO’s decision to exclude stock-linked bonus payments from the calculation of John W. Comrie’s, a former director, nonqualified deferred compensation plan benefits, known as top hat plans. The three-judge panel found it was reasonable for IPSCO to determine that its top hat plan did not factor in stock-linked bonus payments when calculating benefits of departing employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cokenour ERISA Suit
Household Interntional - Board of Direct
The firm represented Household International in a national class action brought in the Northern District of Illinois against our client alleging violations of ERISA related to the investment of plan assets in company stock. In 2003, we obtained the withdrawal of claims against the directors named in this matter. In 2005, we succeeded in settling the case on a basis highly favorable to our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Foreign Trade Council, et al. v. Giannoulias
National Foreign Trade Council Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented the National Foreign Trade Council, eight municipal fire and police pension funds, and eight individual beneficiaries of public pension funds in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 2005 Illinois Act to End Atrocities and Terrorism in the Sudan (the Illinois Sudan Act). The Act prohibited the deposit of Illinois state funds in any financial institution failing to certify that neither it nor any of its borrowers did business related to the country of Sudan. It also prohibited public pension funds from investing in any company that has direct or indirect commercial connections to that country. Winston attorneys argued that the Illinois Sudan Act intruded on the federal government?s exclusive power o
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capgemini U.S. LLC v. Arentowicz
Capgemini North America Inc.
Winston & Strawn attorneys represented Capgemini in an American Arbitration Association proceeding involving an age discrimination claim brought by a former highly compensated vice president seeking $8 million in damages (based on his expert report). The plaintiff alleged that his termination, after 20 years at the company and its predecessor in interest, could only have been because of his age. He alleged that Capgemini engaged in systemic discrimination of those in their 50s. The AAA panel found in Capgemini?s favor, dismissing the employee?s claim in its entirety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cozzi v. Metal Management, Inc.
Albert Cozzi, Frank Cozzi and Gregory Co
Winston & Strawn represented Albert Cozzi (former CEO), Frank Cozzi (former president), and Greg Cozzi (former vice-president) in a non-compete case against their former employer, Metal Management, Inc. A separation and release agreement provided for two severance payments to the Cozzis in exchange for certain non-compete and non-solicitation provisions for an 18-month period. The Cozzis received the first severance payment in January 2004. Shortly before the expiration of the 18-month period when a second payment was due, Metal Management filed a lawsuit alleging the Cozzis engaged in conduct that breached their fiduciary duties while employed as former officers of the company and breached the non-compete and non-solicitation provisions of
|
|
|
|
|
|
UIFO v. United Air Lines, Inc., et al. - I
United Airlines, Inc & UAL Cor
A group of dissident pilots filed this $140 million ADEA and ERISA suit against United and the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) alleging that United?s pilot-defined benefit pension plan was age discriminatory, violated ERISA benefit accrual and fiduciary standards, and failed to refund employee contributions and to give full credit under the plan for all years of service of its older pilots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alday v. Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation
Winston & Strawn represented JSC in a nationwide class action lawsuit filed on behalf of thousands of salaried retirees who claimed that the company's changes to and increases in the cost charged for retiree medical benefits violated, inter alia, ERISA. After extensive discovery and briefs on the issue, the court refused to permit the plaintiffs to proceed with class-wide claims on issues relating to alleged oral and written representations concerning how retiree benefits would be treated. We succeeded in having the class decertified by taking scores of class member depositions-the members’ disparate understanding of their rights deprived the class representatives of key Rule 23 prerequisites. The surviving class claims of breach of fiducia
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gardner v. Container Corporation of America, et al.
Container Corporation of America
We defended Container Corporation of America (CCA) against a plaintiff?s claims of breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA after our client?s benefit plan administrator declined to provide the plaintiff with health insurance coverage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Armstrong, et al. v. Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation
This action was filed in Massachusetts District Court by two retirees who claimed that Jefferson Smurfit breached its fiduciary duties under ERISA by failing to advise them of the tax consequences of accepting lump-sum payments in exchange for discontinuing their health insurance benefits. The retirees sought reimbursement from the company for the income tax liabilities that resulted from their receipt of the cash payments. Winston & Strawn’s motion to dismiss was granted and the First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jackson and Serment v. Brach's Confections
Brach's Confections, Inc.
We defended Brach in a case filed in the Northern District of Illinois in which the plaintiffs claimed they were entitled to substantive benefits due to Brach's alleged procedural violations of ERISA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mulder v. Mercer Management, Marsh McLennan Companies, Inc.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
A jury returned a verdict for our client Mercer, a subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan, after a two-week trial in Washington, D.C. involving claims of sex discrimination and retaliation. Multiple additional claims were dismissed on summary judgment prior to trial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackwell v. Deluxe Corp.
Deluxe Corporation
We represented Deluxe in an ERISA class action in which the plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in damages in connection with the company’s failure to pay severance benefits after the sale of a business unit. The plaintiffs claimed breach of fiduciary duty, failure to pay benefits, Section 510 discrimination, fraud, and estoppel. We won summary judgment for our client on all counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mein v. Carus Chemical Co.
Carus Corporation
A jury returned a verdict for our client Carus after a one-week trial in the Northern District of Illinois involving claims of national origin discrimination and retaliation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friz v. Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
We represented Marsh & McLennan in an ERISA class action suit in which the plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in damages in connection with the administration of a severance pay plan. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's decision to grant summary judgment, dismissing the suit against our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.R. Bard v. Daniel Keating and The Kendall Company
C.R. Bard, Inc. - Chicago
We brought an action in federal court in Massachusetts on behalf of C.R. Bard to enforce non-competition, non-solicitation, and confidentiality provisions contained in a former executive's employment agreement. An injunction was entered against the former employee and the competitor, preventing the former employee from working in certain key product areas and from disclosing confidential information. In rendering its decision, the court adopted and applied the so-called "inevitable disclosure" doctrine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perrin J. Pinta v. Pharmacia Corporation
Pfizer Inc.
Our attorneys represented a Pharmacia in an administrative hearing before the Department of Labor involving claims for severance pay, pro rata bonus amounts and vacation pay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wooten v. Fortune Brands, Inc. and ACCO Office Products
Fortune Brands, Inc.
Our labor and employment attorneys won a directed verdict on behalf of Fortune Brands in a federal court jury trial involving claims of harassment and sex discrimination. The court initially denied our client’s motion for summary judgment and allowed the plaintiff’s claims to proceed to trial. However, at the end of the plaintiff’s case in chief, the court granted our motion for a directed verdict. The plaintiff’s appeals to the Seventh Circuit and the United States Supreme Court were unsuccessful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patricia Peele v. Country Mutual Insurance Company, No. 99 C 638
CC Services, Inc.
Our attorneys achieved success for client Country Mutual Insurance Company in a significant case before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in which the plaintiff, a former employee, claimed sex and age discrimination following her termination. We asked the district court to grant summary judgment, but the court opted to by-pass an analysis of the prima facie case. Our attorneys were successful in convincing the district court that the plaintiff could not prove that the reason given for her termination, an 18-month record of poor performance was pre-text for discrimination. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the decision of the trial court and also granted summary judgment for County Mutual, stating that our client not only demonstrated that the
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharlene Jordan (and Fraternal Order of Police) v. Illinois State Police
Illinois Dept. Of State Police
We represented the Illinois State Police in contract interpretation arbitration in June 2002 involving scheduling of vacation pay under relevant collective bargaining agreement the arbitrator upheld denial of the grievance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clingerman v. Smurfit Stone Container Corp.
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation
Winston & Strawn represented Smurfit-Stone Container in a commercial arbitration in July 2002 involving claims for high-level executive severance and bonus pay following a merger change in control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pharmacia Corporation v. W. Lloyd Sanders and Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc.
Pfizer Inc.
Our labor and employment attorneys represented Pharmacia Corporation in a lawsuit in state court in Dallas County, Texas, against a former manager who was planning to join a competitor. The case presented unique challenges because the former manager had not signed either a confidentiality agreement or a non-compete agreement with Pharmacia. We argued that the former manager would inevitably disclose Pharmacia’s trade secret information in his new position, and obtained a temporary restraining order and an agreed injunction on behalf of our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black & Decker v. Nord
Stanley Black & Decker
The firm secured a 9-0 victory from the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Black & Decker in an ERISA matter. The plaintiff, an employee of subsidiary Kwikset, ceased working due to a back injury and submitted a claim for long-term disability benefits under the company-sponsored disability plan. An independent physician’s exam determined that the plaintiff’s disability was not the result of his regular job, and his claim was denied. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Black & Decker breached its fiduciary duty to the plaintiff. Our client appealed to the Supreme Court, which unanimously reversed the Ninth Circuit’s decision. The Supreme Court held that ERISA does not require plan administrators to give special deference to t
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guy Carpenter, Inc. v. Anthony Provenzale
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
In a significant matter before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, our attorneys sought to enforce a covenant not to solicit on behalf of client Guy Carpenter & Company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gardner v. American Airlines, Inc.
American Airlines
Plaintiff, a former TWA employee pre-merger, sued American and various individuals alleging sex discrimination, retaliation and various state law claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lane v. Atlantic Richfield Corporation (ARCO)
BP America, Inc.
Our attorneys won a motion for summary judgment on behalf of BP in a case brought by a former employee who claimed that her termination from ARCO's Los Angeles oil refinery after her refusal to submit to a random drug test violated her privacy rights and breached an implied employment contract because she was not a safety sensitive employee who could be subjected to random testing. The court found that she was a safety sensitive employee and entered judgment in favor of our client on all claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slames v. Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless
Our labor and employment attorneys defended Verizon Wireless against a former employee's claims of unfair competition related to contract practices, retaliation, and discrimination. Our client filed a cross-complaint against the former employee for the removal of confidential documents from the company. We successfully compelled arbitration of all claims, and following discovery, the plaintiff agreed not to pursue the lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tice v. American Airlines
American Airlines
After a seven-year battle waged through the federal trial and appellate courts, our attorneys secured dismissal of an ADEA class action filed by former pilots against client American Airlines, Inc. for alleged discrimination in disallowing their job bids to flight engineer positions. In response to American's motion for summary judgment, the plaintiffs made various assertions of rights under the applicable labor agreement as the underlying basis of their ADEA claim. American seized the opportunity to move to dismiss because contract-backed claims in the airline industry are the exclusive province of arbitral panels mandated by the Railway Labor Act. The Seventh Circuit decided to stay rather than dismiss the case, and the matter proceeded t
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackwell v. American Airlines
American Airlines
We achieved a jury trial verdict for American Airlines in connection with two claims of retaliatory discharge based on the Americans With Disabilities Act and state law retaliation. The court previously dismissed plaintiff’s ADA discrimination claim on RLA preclusion and held that her ADA retaliation claim was limited to a bench trial without punitive damages. The two-week trial was bifurcated with jury and bench trials running concurrently before Judge Wayne Anderson in the Northern District of Illinois. The court ruled in favor of American Airlines on the bench trial of the ADA retaliation claim. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on the state law retaliation claim, but awarded only $1 in compensatory damages. The judge denied
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alicia Tapia v. Prairie Packaging, Inc.
Prairie Packaging, Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Prairie Packaging in a retaliatory discharge case in which the plaintiff alleged she was terminated in retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim. Following full discovery, briefing on summary judgment and oral arguments for summary judgment, the judge granted our motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case. Following additional oral arguments, the judge denied the plaintiff's motion to reconsider.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hammond v. Wise Alloys
Wise Metals Group LLC
The firm won a motion to dismiss an ERISA class action suit brought against client Wise Alloys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marsh USA, Inc. v. The Hays Group, et al.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
We represented Marsh & McLennan in the District of Columbia Superior Court in a declaratory judgment action brought by a former senior manager seeking to void her noncompetition agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oblix, Inc. v. Winiecki
Oblix, Inc.
Our attorneys assisted Oblix, Inc. compel arbitration of a former employee's gender discrimination and retaliation claims in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The former employee alleged she was not required to arbitrate these claims because her agreement to arbitrate was unconscionable and not enforceable under California law. The Seventh Circuit reversed the United States District Court, and found that the agreement was neither unconscionable nor unenforceable and enforced the agreement. The Court also held that to the extent that California law treated the enforceability of pre-dispute agreements to arbitrate employment claims differently than other claims, it was preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Behrens v. Silliker Laboratories, Inc.
Silliker Laboratories, Inc.
We represented Silliker in a Title VII action brought in the Northern District of Illinois involving sexual harassment and sexual discrimination claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vellma Marcus v. Pharmacia Corporation
Pfizer Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Pharmacia in a negligent retention and supervision and intentional infliction of emotional distress case in Georgia state court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intervention, Inc. v. Blue Cross of California, Inc.
Wellpoint Health Networks, Inc.
We represented WellPoint in two unfair competition cases involving the alleged misclassification of multiple categories of employees, and challenging the administrative and professional exempt status of those employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeung v. Commerce Casino
California Commerce Club, Inc.
Our attorneys represented Commerce Casino in connection with a wrongful termination case brought in Los Angeles Superior Court in which the employee was fired for gaming impropriety while playing cards on duty. It is against Commerce Casino?s policy to play cards while on duty, and the plaintiff was caught engaging in gaming impropriety on videotape surveillance. The situation was particularly egregious because the employee?s job duties included monitoring games to ensure that no impropriety took place, and he actually conspired with the dealer to ?fix? the game so that he would win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
PLATO Learning, Inc. v. Former Employees and New Employer
PLATO Learning, Inc.
On behalf of PLATO Learning, our attorneys brought an employee raiding and non-solicit lawsuit in Alabama state court against three of our client''s former employees and their new employer alleging breach of contract and unfair competition. We obtained a 30-day TRO against the defendants, effectively shutting down their operations in Alabama and Mississippi, and ultimately achieved a favorable settlement for our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bard v. Iso-ray and Ellis
C.R. Bard, Inc. - Chicago
The firm brought a successful non-compete case on behalf of C.R. Bard in the District of New Jersey. We obtained a TRO prohibiting violation of the plaintiff's non-compete agreement and the use of trade secrets and confidential information, and the case ultimately settled on very favorable terms for our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MacLean Fiberglass v. Former Employees and New Employer
MacLean-Fogg Company
Our attorneys obtained a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in South Carolina state court for MacLean Fiber Glass, a subsidiary of client MacLean Fogg, against a former MacLean employee and his new start-up company. While the former employee did not have an employment contract or non-compete agreement with MacLean, the judge granted our request for injunctive relief based on allegations of misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of duty of loyalty, and tortious interference with business relations. The settled on favorable terms for our client, MacLean Fiber Glass, as the former employee and new employer were effectively kept out of the marketplace for six months and, pursuant to a settlement agreement, still are not a
|
|
|
|
|
|
IBEW Local 558 v. Wise Alloys, LLC
Wise Metals Group LLC
After a two-year conflict, our attorneys achieved success for Wise Alloys in a matter tried before the National Labor Relations Board involving back-pay issues. The IBEW and the NLRB demanded that Wise reimburse more than $500,000 in back pay to 16 unionized electricians who had been sent to Wise by the union for hiring, but only one of whom had the necessary credentials and was hired by Wise. The union insisted that Wise Alloys had to hire whomever the union sent to fill position openings, and the company refused to hire anyone who did not satisfy the position requirements it established. At trial, Wise Alloys was successful in convincing the court that all but one of the union referrals failed to meet the job qualifications for
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vasquez v. McCord Travel Management, Inc.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
We represented McCord Travel Management in a wrongful termination lawsuit before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cokenour v. Household International, Inc., et al.
Household Interntional - Board of Direct
The firm represented Household International in a national class action brought in the Northern District of Illinois against our client alleging violations of ERISA related to the investment of plan assets in Company stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food Workers Local 262, UFCW, RWSDU, AFL-CIO and DaVita Dialysis
DaVita Inc.
Our attorneys represented PDI Newark, a blood dialysis center that is part of the DaVita network of dialysis centers, before the NLRB in connection with unfair labor practices charges brought by Local 262 of New Jersey arising out of its attempt to become the exclusive collective bargaining representative of registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and other PDI employees. The union alleged that PDI Newark violated federal labor laws by terminating two employees and threatening other employees. Our attorneys were successful in securing the dismissal of the termination-related charges, while the union withdrew the remaining charges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rosalyn Moore v. Pharmacia
Pfizer Inc.
Winston & Strawn defended Pharmacia against claims of race discrimination under Title VII and § 1981, sex discrimination and retaliation under Title VII, and age discrimination under ADEA brought by a former employee. The court, which determined that Pharmacia articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the former employee's termination, granted summary judgment to our client as to all of the plaintiff’s claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arma Franklin (and SEIU, Local 4) v. Carlton at the Lake, Inc.
Rajchenbach Jack L.
We represented an employer in a wrongful discharge arbitration under the relevant collective bargaining agreement. After a one-day evidentiary hearing, the arbitrator upheld the discharge decision based on just cause and denied the grievance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nenita B. Gonzalez v. Tower Hill Health Care Center
SW Management Company
We represented Tower Hill in a breach of contract and fraud case filed by a former employee in Illinois state court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony, et. al. v. American Airlines, et. al.
American Airlines
This purported class action involved former TWA flight attendants who claimed that their integration into the American Airlines system after the merger violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. We successfully defeated plaintiff's motion for class certification on the grounds that she failed to establish the causation and redressability elements of standing. The court held that the integration resulted not from any agreement between American and the flight attendants union, but because TWA had waived their unions' Allegheny-Mohawk rights during the TWA bankruptcy proceeding. The court also found that even if plaintiff prevailed on her age claim, the court could not award her the relief she sought, retroactive seniority. Therefore,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entercom Boston LLC, Employer, and Gerald J. Callahan, Petitioner, and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, Union, Case 1-RF-2017
Citadel Broadcasting Corporation
Winston & Strawn represented Entercom Boston LLC, an affiliate of Entercom Communications Corp., which owns and operates a nationwide portfolio of radio stations, in a hearing before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) following a mail ballot election to decertify the American Federation of Television and Radio (AFTRA).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unisource Worldwide, Inc. v. Sparrow, King and Midland Paper Co.
Midland Paper Company
Our attorneys represented the defendants in a breach of contract (covenant not to compete), trade secret, and breach of duty of loyalty case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Airline Pilots Association v. Pan American Airlines, et al.
Pan Am Systems Inc. (f/k/a Guilford Tran
Our attorneys defended Pan Am Airlines in a suit brought by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) under the Railway Labor Act for an injunction and damages related to Pan Am's decision to move all work from its unionized airline to a non-union affiliate, Boston-Maine Airways. ALPA initially won a TRO and preliminary injunction in the trial court. Our attorneys then obtained a full reversal, dissolution of the injunction, and remand for trial on damages. After discovery and motion practice, the trial court entered summary judgment in Pan Am's favor on all counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unisource, Inc. v. Schroeder
Midland Paper Company
Winston & Strawn attorneys prevailed in a noncompete case before the District of Minnesota in which Unisource, Inc. sued our client, Rick Schroeder, who recently moved his business to Midland Paper Co., a Unisource competitor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peggy Hawkins-Dean v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., et al.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Our attorneys were successful on behalf of MetLife in having the United States Supreme Court vacate and remand a decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in an ERISA disability benefits case. Our attorneys represented MetLife, administrator of Robert Half International?s long-term health and disability plan, in case brought by a Robert Half employee. The Ninth Circuit held that MetLife should have included the amount the employee earned from stock options in her disability benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paulsen v. CNF, Inc. et al.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PB
Winston & Strawn attorneys represented the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) in a class action alleging breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA. PBGC won summary judgment on the pleadings that a plaintiff could not bring such an action under Title I of ERISA against PBGC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Alexander v. Caraustar Mill Group, Inc.
Caraustar Industries
Our attorneys secured summary judgment for Caraustar Mill Group in an action brought by a former employee in the Western District of New York. The plaintiff alleged claims of wrongful termination and discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York Human Rights Act. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, determining that the person who made the decision to terminate the employee had no prior knowledge of the disability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abbott Laboratories Non-Compete Litigation
Abbott Laboratories
Winston & Strawn attorneys defend Abbott Laboratories in a lawsuit brought by a pharmaceutical company alleging that Abbott misappropriated trade secrets and hired away from the plaintiff one of its top scientists in the field of diabetes-related research and development. The lawsuit was aggressively pursued by the plaintiff, who unsuccessfully sought an injunction prohibiting Abbott from hiring the scientist. On behalf of Abbott, Winston attorneys not only compiled significant evidence demonstrating that there had not been any trade secrets disclosed or misappropriated, but also took early, decisive steps in the litigation that ultimately brought the plaintiff to the bargaining table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guy Carpenter & Company, Inc. v. John B. Collins Associates, Inc., Stephen Underdal, Todd Mockler, Randy Floden, Robert Roehrig, and Hannah Kuhn
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
Our attorneys represent Guy Carpenter & Company in connection with a breach of contractual restrictive covenants and related tort and damages claims brought against John B. Collins Associates and five former employees who worked in Carpenter?s Minneapolis office. In July 2005, the five employees resigned from Carpenter and began working for Collins, a direct competitor of Carpenter, and solicited former Carpenter clients to move their business to Collins, which they did. The matter was settled before trial on favorable terms to our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Farmers Insurance Wage & Hour Litigation
Farmers Group Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Farmers Insurance Exchange in a multi-district litigation consolidating seven separate federal actions in which the plaintiffs alleged that Farmers improperly classified more than 6,100 of its current and former claims adjusters nationwide as exempt from the overtime pay requirements under the FLSA and various states’ laws. After a three-week bench trial, the court ruled that the insurance company had a complete defense to liability as to the plaintiffs’ federal FLSA claim for almost three years of the statutory period and that only limited categories of employees were entitled to back overtime pay. We then succeeded in obtaining an order requiring individual damages proceedings for each class member. Following
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackwell v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc.
SkyWest Airlines Inc.
Winston & Strawn secured a significant victory for SkyWest Airlines, Inc. when the Southern District of California denied a former employees motion for class certification in a case filed as a wage and hour class action. The plaintiff asked the Southern District Court of California to certify a class of nearly 4,000 current and former SkyWest customer service agents in California into five subclasses, one for each of her various claims. The plaintiff alleged the airline violated state and federal laws by denying meal breaks, issuing inaccurate wage statements, imposing unlawful alternative workweek schedules resulting in unpaid overtime, refusing to pay overtime for voluntary shift trades, and deducting wages to pay for travel benefits with
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Fulka v. Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation, Inc.
Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation,
Winston & Strawn represented Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation (NMFF) in a case brought by a former employee in the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiff claimed that NMFF had interfered with his taking of intermittent FMLA leave and had terminated him in retaliation for taking such leave. Winston attorneys argued that the plaintiff''s interference claim must be dismissed because he was granted all leave that he requested. We also argued that his retaliation claim should be dismissed because he was not meeting NMFF''s legitimate expectations at the time he was terminated. The court agreed with Winston''s arguments for NMFF, dismissing the case in its entirety on our motion for summary judgment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Psychemedics Corporation v. Diagnostixx of California et al.
Immunalysis Corporation
Winston & Strawn labor and employment attorneys represented Immunalysis (Diagnostixx of California d/b/a Immunalysis Corporation and Haptenics Corporation d/b/a Kinex Company), which manufactures drug test kits for laboratories that test bodily fluids and hair for various drugs of abuse in a breach of contract arbitration brought by Psychemedics Corporation, a publicly traded company that provides drug testing services. In 1997, Immunalysis entered into a contract with Psychemedics through which Immunalysis agreed to manufacture radioactive isotopes for Psychemedics'' drug testing. The contract also contained a clause that permits Psychemedics to reserve a certain antibody used for its marijuana drug tests for the express purpose o
|
|
|
|
|
|
University of Chicago Argonne Laboratories v. Bannon and Burton
UChicago Argonne, LLC
Winston & Strawn represented Argonne Laboratories in a lawsuit brought in the Northern District of Illinois by two former female employees for national origin and gender discrimination based on theories of hostile work environment, constructive discharge, and retaliation. The plaintiffs alleged that their former supervisor made comments regarding their gender and national origin, prevented them from receiving certain promotions, and ultimately discharged them in retaliation for their complaints. The Northern District of Illinois granted summary judgment to Argonne, and a unanimous panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed on all counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks
Harte-Hanks Shoppers Inc. / Penny Saver
Winston & Strawn filed an amicus brief in the California Supreme Court on behalf of client Employers Group on behalf of Harte-Hanks Shoppers in support of its practice of reimbursing employees for their job-related expenses through increased wages or commissions, as opposed to direct reimbursement for actual costs. The California Supreme Court upheld this practice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee v. Major Pharmaceutical Company
Winston & Strawn represented a major pharmaceutical company in an age discrimination claim before the Central District of California. The plaintiff alleged a pattern of widespread selective enforcement of safety rules against older employees to obstruct them from attaining full retirement benefits. After the second session of the plaintiff''s deposition, the plaintiff was confronted with damaging impeachment evidence uncovered during Winston''s investigation of the matter. The plaintiff and his counsel voluntarily offered to dismiss the claim with prejudice in exchange for our client''s agreement not to pursue fees and costs, and our client agreed to this resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kanoff v. Better Life Renting Corp. and Lefrak Organizations, Inc.
The Lefrak Organization, Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Better Life Renting Corp. and Lefrak Organizations, Inc. in a New Jersey federal court action brought by a former employee alleging age discrimination in the termination of her employment in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. Our clients moved to dismiss or to stay pending arbitration, and moved to compel arbitration. The court dismissed the plaintiff''s claims without prejudice. We further obtained dismissal of two appeals filed by the plaintiff with the Third Circuit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miller v. American Airlines
American Airlines
Winston & Strawn represented American Airlines in an EEOC claim brought by flight engineers after the airline eliminated all remaining flight engineer positions in 2002. In the 1980s, American had entered into an agreement with the flight engineers'' union that guaranteed that should flight engineer positions be eliminated, any then-current flight engineer would be guaranteed another comparably paying position with the airline until the flight engineer reached normal retirement age. The plaintiffs, all in their seventies, claimed that they were discriminated against because they were not provided comparably paying positions by the airline upon the elimination of the flight engineer position, even though they were offered other pos
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hollis v. Rosa Mexicana DC LLC
Shelter Group (d/b/a Rosa Mexicano)
Winston recently secured dismissal of a key case on behalf of our client, Rosa Mexicano DC, LLC, dispensing with plaintiff's claims of public accommodation discrimination and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff claimed that Rosa Mexicano discriminated against her on the basis of her race and caused her severe emotional distress when it did not promptly seat her party of five. The district court for the District of Columbia dismissed plaintiff's Title II public accommodation discrimination claim, holding that she failed to comply with clear procedural mandates. Specifically, plaintiff was required to first notify a relevant local authority of the alleged discrimination before proceeding with her federal suit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wright v. Southwest Airlines Co.
Southwest Airlines Co.
Winston recently secured summary judgment in the District of Maryland against an employee who brought claims of wrongful discharge and retaliation against our client, Southwest Airlines Co.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jackson v. American Airlines, Inc.
American Airlines
The plaintiff, a former fueler for American, filed a two-count complaint in federal court alleging age and race-based discriminatory suspension and discharge. American discharged the plaintiff after he submitted payroll authorizations seeking to get paid for time he did not work. Our attorneys won summary judgment on both counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ganzy and Vidot v. Sun Chemical Corp.
Sun Chemical Corporation
Winston & Strawn represented Sun Chemical in a lawsuit brought by former Hispanic and African-American employees alleging race discrimination after they were discharged upon the employer''s discovery that they had lied about their criminal histories on employment applications. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted the defendant''s motion for summary judgment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Gacek v. American Airlines, Inc.
American Airlines
Plaintiff John Gacek filed suit against his former employer, American Airlines, alleging that he was terminated in retaliation for pursuing rights under the Illinois Worker''s Compensation Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee v. Major Electronics Company
Winston & Strawn successfully defended a major electronics manufacturer in an action brought by a former employee. The plaintiff alleged he was not promoted and was terminated due to his race, disability, national origin, and gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perius v. Abbott Laboratories
Abbott Laboratories
Winston & Strawn defended Abbott Laboratories in federal court against allegations brought by the plaintiff alleging Abbott wrongfully terminated his employment for whistleblowing, cancelled his stock options in a breach of contract, defamed him, and intentionally inflicted emotional distress. The plaintiff also sought indemnity for all of his legal expenses. Both parties moved for summary judgment on all claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jain v. Marsh Inc., et al.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
Winston & Strawn attorneys obtained summary judgment for three Marsh affiliates on a five-count federal complaint alleging race, color and national origin discrimination; retaliation; hostile work environment; and constructive discharge. The former employee had resigned after receiving poor performance reviews and was removed from client accounts. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected the claims in their entirety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vazquez v. Southside United Housing Development Fund and Los Sures Management Company
Winston & Strawn (Pro Bono)
Winston & Strawn successfully defended Southside United Housing Development Fund and property management company Los Sures Management Company against a former property manager''s claims in the Southern District of New York for race, national origin, age, and disability discrimination and retaliation. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer, and the Second Circuit dismissed the plaintiff''s appeal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Select A Region
Search for an attorney.
