Charging Party v. Telecom
Plaintiff is an African American female who while employed as a Sales Associate at Silver Spring was subject to harassment and discrimination because of her sex. She was also discriminated because of her disability. The case is still pending investigation by the EEOC.
Charging Party v. Health Corp.
Plaintiff was terminated hours after she informed her employer that she had a terminal illness. A charge was filed for discrimination as under the American Disabilities Act. The case is still pending investigation by the EEOC. If no resolution is reached within the 180 days investigatory period, an action will be filed in Court.
Alfaro and Alfaro v. Marriott. Case No. 2017 CA 00367B
Plaintiffs were bartenders at Marriott Hotel in Washington D.C when they were terminated and replaced by male staff persons. The female plaintiff was also sexually harassed by her supervisor, when he asked her for sexual favors. An action for discrimination, harassment (hostile work environment) and retaliation was filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia. Trial will take place in 2023.
Ali v. BC Architects. Case No. 18-cv-1385
Ali an Arab female was subject to retaliation after complaining about work placed discrimination. Ali filed a complaint seeking $3 million in damages. The case is presently on appeal for the second time at the U.S. Fourth Circuit. Ali had prevailed on her first appeal at the Fourth Circuit.
B&S Glass et al v. Del Metro et al. Case No. 20-cv-02769.
The Plaintiff, a contractor, was wrongly terminated from his construction contract by Del Metro. An action for unpaid wages and race discrimination under Section 1981 was filed in Federal Court in the District of Columbia.
Bison v. Strategic Behavioral Health. Case No. 21-cv-939
Plaintiff a management official at a Nevada Hospital witnessed Medicare fraud at the medical facility alleging that the facility was not treating its patients. An action for violations of the False Claims Act was filed in the U.S District Court in Nevada. The case is presently in discovery.
Chien v. U.S. State Department. Case No. 16-cv-1583
Plaintiff an Assistant Regional Security Officer at US Embassies was subject to discrimination and retaliation while employed by the State Department. In March 2022, the case went to trial, and the jury awarded $650,000 in damages to Chien for violations of Title VII.
Falk v. Georgia Television. Case No. 2021 CA 3107B; Falk v. CBS. Case No. 2021 CA 3866B
Plaintiff was defamed when they claimed that Falk was part of the January 6, 2021, rioters in Washington DC. Falk was in Atlanta on this day. Both media defendants filed a SLAPP Motion seeking dismissal of the case. Both motions were denied by the Court. The case is presently on appeal.
Jaafar v. Citigroup, Citibank and Jason Fedash. Case No: 2021 CA 003135 B.
Plaintiff an Arab-American Muslim from Morocco was discriminated and harassed by his Caucasian supervisor Jason Fedash, the Managing Director at Citibank. In March 2018 Fedash also told the Plaintiff that “because you are Arab and a Muslim, you should appreciate the fact that you are even hired by Citibank.” After the Plaintiff confronted Fedash with financial fraud, Fedash also boasted that, “I will never get into trouble for this, because I am protected by White men. Now if that happened to you, based on your background, because you are an Arab and a Muslim, you would be fired on the spot. This is the power of White people.” An action for discrimination, harassment and retaliation was filed at the DC Superior Court on August 31, 2021. The complaint can be accessed here Complaint Jaafar v. CITIBANK.
Janmahmodova v. Reach Media dba Iran International TV. Case No. 2022 CA 685B
The Plaintiff a journalist from Tajikistan was subject to race, sex and religious discrimination while working at the DC Office of Iran International TV. In 2022, an action for discrimination, harassment and retaliation was filed in DC Superior Court. The case is in discovery.
Sandler v. U.S. State Department. Case No. 21-cv-2226
Sandler a former diplomat at the State Department was subject to disability discrimination, age and sex harassment, along with retaliation. An action for violations of the Rehabilitation Act, Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) was filed in Federal Court in the District of Columbia.
Smith v. United Planning Organization. Case No. 2020 CA 004773B
The Plaintiff a management official was terminated after raising complaints of corporate fraud. An action for retaliation and for violation of the DC whistleblower laws was filed in DC Superior Court. In 2022, the Court denied UPO’s motion for summary judgement on the whistleblower claim. Trial is scheduled for 2023.