We are incredibly experienced in representing employers and insurers in the complex and ever-changing landscape of employment litigation. We are extremely familiar with proceedings before administrative agencies and labor arbitrators as well as litigation in state and federal courts. Our clients include municipalities, governmental authorities, public corporations, private companies, and insurers. We assist at all levels of potential claims and take pride in anticipating and addressing issues, often resolving problems before they turn into litigation. Our experience in successfully defending clients’ employment litigation includes the following:
- Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
- Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
- “At-will” employment/wrongful termination cases
- Defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress
- Discrimination/harassment claims under Elliott-Larson Civil Rights Act (race, religion, national origin, age, sex, height, weight, and marital status)
- Employment Practices Liability Insurance (EPLI) claims – evaluation and strategies
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Hostile workplace
- Michigan Department of Civil Rights (MDCR)
- Retaliation claims
- Title VII & Civil Rights Acts of 1964
- Whistleblower claims under Michigan and federal statutes
- Wage and hour
Smith v City of Inkster, et al.
This case involved a high-profile member of the police department who claimed the City violated the Whistle-Blower’s Protection Act. Plaintiff was represented by the Fieger firm. Weeks of trial resulted in an adverse jury verdict, but the case settled favorably on Appeal.
Dokes v City of Inkster, et al.
Plaintiff filed this employment case alleging numerous theories of breach of contract, torts and violations of Federal statutes. The Federal Court granted Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed all of Plaintiff’s claims. This dismissal was upheld on appeal.
Clark v ERMC
We tried this case in the State of Michigan’s MES Board of Review. Ms. Clark was claiming unemployment benefits. Initially, the MESC granted Ms. Clark’s unemployment benefits. After trial, however, the Board of Review reversed the decision, finding Ms. Clark voluntarily quit. In addition to terminating Ms. Clark’s unemployment benefits, the Board of Review ordered Ms. Clark to repay all benefits received to date.