July 2015. Lippman, Semsker & Salb achieves success in an appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in the case of Radtke v. Caschetta. The case arose when Caschetta failed to pay overtime wages to our clients. We successfully tried the case before a jury. After trial, Caschetta appealed, seeking to overturn the jury’s determination. The Court of Appeals found no merit in Caschetta’s arguments. Click here to read the opinion. Click here to listen to an audio recording of Micah Salb arguing the case before the Court of Appeals.
June 2015. Lippman, Semsker & Salb achieves success in an appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, in the case of Bocek v. JGA Associates. The case arose when Joseph Amato, the owner of JGA Associates, was hired by Dr. Bocek to assist him in the purchase of a medical practice. Acting behind Dr. Bocek’s back, Mr. Amato stole the opportunity and purchased the practice for his own benefit. The trial judge issued a decision against Dr. Bocek and we appealed. Not only did the Court of Appeals agree that the trial judge had erred, but the Court of Appeals also agreed with us that we had soundly proved that in fact Dr. Bocek was entitled to judgment in his favor. The case will now be sent back to the trial judge for a determination of the damages that Dr. Bocek is entitled to receive. Click here to read the opinion. Click here to listen to an audio recording of Micah Salb arguing the case before the Court of Appeals.
January 2008. Lippman, Semsker & Salb achieves success in an arbitration proceeding. Our client, an eye surgeon, was terminated from her position in violation of the “good cause” provision and in breach of contract. The arbitrator awarded her damages of more than $85,000 and also awarded her fees and costs in excess of $90,000.
October 2007. In a discovery dispute, our Firm protected our client by barring the defendant from obtaining highly intimate photographs and videos of our client which had no purpose in the litigation other than to embarrass our client. The decision, which has been officially published, has been widely addressed in the legal media, including discussion on some dozen or more legal blogs.
August 2006. Lippman, Semsker & Salb, LLC has reached a settlement of discrimination claims brought by two computer programmers against a local university. Our clients, who were computer programmers for the university, alleged that younger employees and male employees were given unfair advantage in assignments and promotions and that they were illegally discriminated against when they were selected for layoff in a reduction in force. The settlement was reached to the mutual satisfaction of the parties.
Lippman, Semsker & Salb represents three seasoned African-American attorneys in the Legal Service Section of the Child Support Services Division of the Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia in a claim of discrimination. One attorney has reached a settlement but the other two cases are likely to be litigated. Claims and Background. Tia Clark and Eboni Govan have charged the Office of Attorney General with a claim of race-based disparate treatment and hostile work environment. Their claim is based on discriminatory treatment which began in late July of 2004, shortly after the appointment of Kristin Henriksen as the new Chief of the Legal Service Division. They allege that since her arrival, Henrikson has shown a clear and unmistakable preference toward White attorneys. Our clients’ allegations include:
Immediately after her arrival, Henrikson began to monitor the arrival times of the African-American attorneys in the office but not the White attorneys.
- Henrikson routinely allowed the White attorneys to take care of personal business during the working day and did not require them to submit leave slips but simply allowed them to make up the time at the end of the day. In contrast, African-American employees were extended no such courtesy.
- Henrickson routinely assigned African-Americans the most difficult calendars without support; but when White attorneys needed support she was quick to reassign personnel.
- Henrickson expressed to a number of White attorneys that she thinks some of the African-American attorneys have no legal skills and that she is would not renew the contract of another African-American attorney.
- Henrikson referred to two African-American attorneys as lazy, whom she allegedly said she would like to fire but it is too difficult because they are permanent employees.
- Henrikson frequently mimicked some of the Office’s clients using the phrase “who my baby daddy?”
In November 2004, David Halpern and The Washington Center for Internships and Academic Seminars were pleased to announce that they reached an early settlement of Mr. Halpern’s claim of sexual orientation discrimination and retaliation. Mr. Halpern was a Program Supervisor for The Washington Center, where he placed college interns into positions which matched their interest. Congressman Barney Frank wrote a letter objecting to The Washington Center’s decision not to place a student in his office because the member of Congress is gay. The details of the case appeared in the media attention that the case garnered in various media, such as the following: The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Grand Rapids Press, Roll Call, 365Gay.com, and The Washington Blade. (Please click on the media name to see the article.)
July 28, 2005—Lippman, Semsker, & Salb to represent three African American lawyers from the OAG claiming racial bias by their supervisor. [ Read Article ]
July 15, 2005—Partner Micah Salb has been elected to the Steering Committee of the DC Bar Labor and Employment Law Section
July 1, 2005. Robert Haro, an employee of the Drug Enforcement Agency, has sued the Agency for age discrimination. Mr. Haro was entitled to be given preference in transfers back to the United States from his post in Madrid. He sought transfer back to Los Angeles. Instead, the Agency transferred him to a less desirable position, hiring seven younger employees to fill vacant positions in Los Angeles. haro v. gonzales, Case No. [unassigned] (U.S. Dist. Court for Eastern Dist. of Virginia).
June 20, 2005. Amtrak settles race discrimination suit brought by a worker who suffered harsh penalty for alleged mild misconduct, while White employees consistently received little or no discipline for serious misconduct. The terms of the settlement are confidential. evans v. National railroad passenger corp., Case No. 02cv2369 (U.S. Dist. Court for D.C.).
June 16, 2005. Lippman, Semsker & Salb issues a press release on behalf of Anna Kashtan. Ms. Kashtan suffered anti-Jewish discrimination when her boss Mark Housden, fired her from her position at Applebee’s.
June 2005. The Chief Executive Officer of George Washington University Hospital and the named Plaintiffs meet for a settlement meeting in the class action claim brought by Lippman, Semsker & Salb against the hospital. The suit alleges class-based disparate impact discrimination. Settlement discussions are on-going.
April 22, 2005. Lippman, Semsker & Salb serves Georgetown University with a second lawsuit complaining about age, gender, and sexual orientation discrimination based on Georgetown’s reduction in force in its Information Services department. The first lawsuit, Ausman v. Georgetown University, was settled in July 2004. Hicks and Nudelman v. Georgetown University.
April 20, 2005. The Transportation Security Agency settles race and gender discrimination suit. The terms are confidential. Ashton v. Transportation Security Agency, Docket No. 120-2004-00527X (EEOC).
March 16, 2005. The U.S. Department of Interior settles age discrimination and retaliation suit. The Department of Interior re-posted a vacancy five times, with Mr. Bennett at the top of the list each time. On each occasion, the individual hired was younger. The terms of the settlement include a payment for back pay and attorney’s fees. Mr. Bennett had secured a more prestigious position in advance of the settlement. bennett v. norton, C.A. No. 03ca00435 (U.S. Dist. Court for D.C.).
March 5, 2005. The National Labor Relations Board settles age discrimination and reverse discrimination suit brought against it for a failure to hire. The settlement included a payment to Mr. Koslow for back pay and attorney’s fees. koslow v. hurtgen, C.A. No. 02ca1096 (U.S. Dist. Court for D.C.).
September 7, 2004. George Washington University Hospital and the named Plaintiffs in the potential class action lawsuit ask the Court for a stay of the litigation while they embark on settlement discussions.
July 22, 2004. David Ausman reached an early settlement with Georgetown University, after conducting written discovery but no depositions. Mr. Ausman was terminated due to a Reduction in Force in the Information Technology division. He alleged that he and other employees were unfairly selected to be terminated, because African-American, older, and female employees were disproportionately selected for termination. Another claim was brought by two other similarly-situated employees. The terms are confidential. Ausman v. Georgetown Univ., C.A. No. 03ca008631 (D.C. Super. Ct.).
June 25, 2004. Lippman, Semsker & Salb files Motion for Class Certification in a case against George Washington University Hospital on behalf of applicants for employment who were forced to take a test which evidence shows to discriminate against Black employees. Marable et al. v. George Washington University Hospital, C.A. No. 1:01cv02361 (U.S. Distr. Court, D. of Columbia). (Please click here for more information about this case.)
June 3, 2004. Lippman, Semsker & Salb files a Complaint against Preston Ford in Preston, Maryland, as a result of a campaign of vulgar sexual harassment against Vanda Simpkins, a sales assistant at the auto dealership. Simpkins v. Preston Ford, C.A. 04cv1736 (U.S. Distr. Court, D. of Maryland).
April 23, 2004. Lippman, Semsker & Salb files a Complaint against the Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated in Chatham, Virginia. The suit was filed because Mr. Wright, a Route Salesman who had worked for the company for many years, was harassed and then fired by a new supervisor. The supervisor treated Black employees worse than White employees. The suit alleges that the supervisor used racial slurs such as “boy” and “nigger”. Wright v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated, 4:04 cv 30 (U.S. Distr. Court., Western District of Virginia). Lippman, Semsker & Salb is working with the firm Daniel Vaughn Medley & Smitherman in Danville, Virginia, a full-service law firm with a top rating from Martindale-Hubbell. (Click on their firm name for more information.)
April 15, 2004. Lippman, Semsker & Salb files suit against General Electric Co. for termination of top-rated high-level manager of Swiss subsidiary. The suit alleges discrimination based on race and sex. Henderson v. GE Co., C.A. No. 3:03cv2176 (U.S. Distr. Court, D. of Connecticut). Lippman & Semsker is working with the firm, Livingston, Adler, Pulda, Meiklejohn & Kelly, a well-known labor law firm based in Hartford, Connecticut. (Click on their firm name for more information.)
December 2003. Halpern case draws national media attention.
December 11, 2003. Lippman & Semsker files a Complaint against The Washington Center for Internships and Academic Seminars (“TWC”). Halpern v. TWC, 03-009909 (D.C. Super. Ct.) TWC fired an employee one day after he objected to using discriminatory criteria. TWC agreed to a client’s request not to place a student with a gay congressman, which violates D.C.’s law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. TWC’s termination of Mr. Halpern constitutes unlawful retaliation. (Please click here for more information about this case.)
November 7, 2003. Lippman & Semsker files suit against Howard University for failure to award tenure to a faculty member, alleging breach of contract. Allworth v. Howard University, C.A. No. 3-8998 (D.C. Super. Ct.) Please click here for more information about this case. This case demonstrates this Firm’s commitment to education and faculty representation.
October 20, 2003. Lippman & Semsker files suit against Georgetown University, alleging age discrimination in large layoff of Information Technology employees. Ausman v. Georgetown Univ., C.A. No. 03ca008631 (D.C. Super. Ct.)
In December 2002 our client Walter Smith was successful in his claim against Raytheon Corp. following a five-day jury trial. A jury awarded him $115,000 after he proved that a top Raytheon manager made significant misrepresentations to him about his new job with the company.