Philadelphia Sexual Harassment Lawyers: Verdict Against FedEx For Sexual Harassment

By ,

A federal jury awarded $3.2 million in a sexual harassment suit against Federal Express Corp. — including $2.5 million in punitive damages despite a $300,000 federal cap on damages. Pennsylvania case law bars awards of punitive damages under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act. Plaintiff, Marion Shaub, was a former FedEx tractor-trailer driver, who claimed she was harassed by her supervisor and co-workers and that the brakes on her truck were sabotaged on five occasions in an attempt to intimidate her.

The jury found in favor of Shaub on her sexual harassment and retaliation claims and concluded that FedEx was liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Shaub was awarded $101,400 in back pay; $290,000 in front pay; $350,000 in compensatory damages for emotional suffering; and $2.5 million in punitive damages, for a total award of $3,241,400.

Although Pennsylvania case law bars awards of punitive damages under the PHRA, they are allowed under Title VII — but cannot exceed the cap. FedEx is likely appeal, to argue that the punitive damages must be reduced by $950,000. EEOC regional attorney Jacqueline McNair said the verdict “sends employers a loud and clear message that sex discrimination and retaliation are simply unacceptable.”

For more information on gender discrimination or sexual harassment in the workplace, call Philadelphia gender discrimination lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green at 215-574-0600 or contact us online.  

Philadelphia Whistleblower Lawyers: Endo Pharmaceuticals Whistleblower to Receive $33.6 Million

By ,

Endo Pharmaceuticals whistleblower Peggy Ryan has been awarded $33.6 million as a result of the qui tam complaint she filed against the company in 2005. Ryan’s payout constitutes roughly 24% of the federal government’s cut of the $171.9 million settlement Endo agreed to pay for illegally promoting the drug Lidoderm for off-label use.

While the U.S. Government disputes the 24% figure, arguing that she should receive only 19%, U.S. District Judge Robert F. Kelly ruled that Ryan’s “extraordinary” contributions to the near decade-long litigation merited a larger sum. In his memorandum, Judge Kelly noted that Ryan “nurtured the flame at the darkest times when a favorable outcome seemed most remote” and “enabled the government investigatory team to recover evidence which would have otherwise been unobtainable”.

In a statement to the Legal Intelligencer, Peggy Ryan’s attorney wrote, “It is never easy to be a whistleblower, especially when a case goes on for a decade, but Ms. Ryan has remained dedicated to the cause of exposing fraud…We hope Judge Kelly’s decision to grant Ms. Ryan close to the maximum percentage will encourage other individuals with evidence of fraud against the government to come forward.”

Philadelphia Whistleblower Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green protect those who expose Fraudulent Government Practices

Qui Tam Lawyers in Philadelphia at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green have extensive experience protecting whistleblowers who have evidence of fraud against the government. Whistleblowers often have information and evidence that would otherwise be unobtainable, however it takes a great deal of courage to come forward. Our Philadelphia whistleblower lawyers understand that disclosing fraudulent behavior puts employees in a vulnerable position. For knowledgeable legal counsel regarding whistleblower actions, call our Philadelphia, Pennsylvania law offices at 215-574-0600 to schedule a consultation or submit an inquiry online.

Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Report: Jury Awards Man for Unnecessary Skin Grafts

By ,

Plaintiff, Wismond Brissett, a 45-year-old truck driver, was cooking without wearing a shirt when the cooking grease caught fire. In Brissett v. Watts, Brissett was awarded $3 million for pain and suffering after Dr. David C. Watts failed to meet the standard of care. He performed a skin graft, which caused the plaintiff unnecessary pain and scarring.  He was brought to the hospital and was diagnosed as having first- and second-degree burns on eight percent of his body.

Brissett was referred to Watts and his practice, Plastic & Cosmetic Surgery Institute for the burns, after an initial meeting with his primary care doctor, where Watts diagnosed Brissett as having first-, second- and third-degree burns over 15 to 20% of his body and explained that Brissett needed surgery.

During the surgery, the burns were debrided, and then skin was taken from Brissett’s thigh and grafted to both his forearms and the right side of his chest. The skin graft left Brissett with severe scars and pain. Brissett’s wounds would have healed with only minor scarring if the surgery had not been performed.

Philadelphia Trial Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Represent Victims of Unnecessary Skin Grafts

Philadelphia trial lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green offer a wide range of legal counseling to injured victims in Philadelphia. We are available to our clients 24 hours a day. No case is too big or too small. Our Philadelphia trial lawyers have diverse skills and decades of experience in varied legal services. Located in the heart of Center City, Philadelphia we serve clients throughout the Philadelphia area. Call 215-574-0600 to schedule a consultation or submit an online contact form.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers:  Cyber-hacking and Class Action Lawsuits

By ,

Recent news coverage has shown a proliferation in cyber-hacks—hackers stealing information about former and current employees including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, employment records, including compensation records, human resources, records, medical information and financial information from both large corporations as well as the Government.

Class action litigation has been initiated as a result of these data breaches. In order for a plaintiff to bring an action as a result of a data breach a plaintiff must have suffered an injury to have standing. That injury must be “concrete and particularized” and “actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.” Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). If identity was “stolen” but has not been used by anyone else, can you still bring a lawsuit? A plaintiff who can prove that a hacker used his information has a much stronger argument than a plaintiff who can allege only an increased risk of identity theft.

The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Spokeo v. Robins, 724 F.3d 409 (9th Cir. 2014), which could change the injury requirement for a plaintiff trying to bring a lawsuit after their personal information has been hacked. The court will have to decide whether Congress may confer standing on a plaintiff who had not suffered a concrete injury, but rather permit a private right of action based on the violation of a federal statute.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Protect Victims of Cyber-Hacking

Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green have the experience to pursue lawsuits for individuals who have had their privacy violated by having their personal information hacked. Our Philadelphia business law firm offers free consultations at our convenient Philadelphia, Pennsylvania location. Call Sidkoff, Pincus & Green at 215-574-0600 or complete our online contact form to see how a Philadelphia business lawyer at our office can help you.

Philadelphia Business Attorneys: Carpenter Awards $3 Million after Stairway Collapse

By ,

In White v. Drywall, a jury awarded plaintiff, White, $2.5 million for past and future damages, and $500,000 to his wife for loss of consortium after he broke his shoulder on a temporary staircase that collapsed while he was walking on it. White contended that defendant, Beiler Construction LLC, negligently installed the temporary staircase, and that the general contractor was negligent for allowing an unsafe and dangerous condition at the work site.

In January 2012 White was working on a project where defendant, Beiler Construction LLC installed a set of temporary stairs on the work site, and defendant Drywall Inc. was the drywall subcontractor. When White walked down the staircase, he fell to the level below because the staircase gave way. White and other workers had previously reported on numerous occasions that the stairs were unusually wobbly.

White’s doctor said he would have permanent restrictions, and could only use his arm for light duty. White contends that the fall caused radiculopathy in his back and neck, impaired vision, and degeneration in his spine and shoulder, preventing him from playing with his children. The jury found that the two drywall companies and the company that installed the temporary staircase were liable for the incident.

Philadelphia Business Attorneys at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Protect Workers Injured due to Negligent General Contractors

Philadelphia business attorneys at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. are experienced in protecting workers injured by unsafe work conditions and negligent construction companies. Our dedicated team of commercial attorneys in Philadelphia assist clients in a wide range of complex litigation matters, including injuries caused by negligent general contractors. Our highly reputable Philadelphia business law firm is conveniently located in Philadelphia and we represent clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Call 215-574-0600 to schedule a consultation or submit an online contact form.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers: New Report Released on Trademark Litigation

By ,

Trademark litigation is a niche area of the legal field, with over 4,000 cases filed last year. Lex Machina, a legal analysis company, recently conducted a comprehensive study on trademark litigation. The report examined all aspects of trademark cases and defined metrics such as number of filings and amounts of damages awarded. The Trademark Litigation Report published findings that since 2009, trademark lawyers have filed nearly 25,000 cases, resulting in over nine billion dollars in damage payments over the course of five years.

The purpose of the study, according to Lex Machina, was to help business attorneys determine effective strategies for all types of trademark litigation cases by quantifying results from past cases. The Trademark Litigation Report is a useful resource for trademark lawyers, especially for its analysis of damage award payouts. The report determined that of the nine billion dollars in damages paid out, more monies have been awarded by juries rather than by judges. Furthermore, most cases are decided through default judgements.

Litigation Cycle of Trademark Cases

The litigation cycle of each type of case was also measured. Certain trademark cases reach an injunction stage much faster than other cases, specifically cases that involve cybersquatting. Copyright cases and patent cases take longer to get to the injunction stage, while cases involving false advertising almost always face a slow, lengthy process during both initial and long-term injunction.

Lex Machina has also conducted reports analyzing patent litigation in several different districts, and the trademark report follows the same patterns by looking at cases in high profile judicial areas such as the Southern District of New York, the Southern District of Florida, the Central District of California and the Northern District of Illinois. These courts deal with major and luxury fashion brands as well as music and film trademark cases.

The Trademark Litigation Report is divided into two sections; the first part of the report defines and analyzes metrics for the past five years of trademark cases, while the second section details how major retailers and brands have been involved in trademark law over the course of the study. Specific companies profiled include BMW, Nike, Chanel and Dunkin’ Donuts, and the report includes information on the overall outcome of each case.

Trademark Lawyers in Philadelphia at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green help Commercial Clients Avoid and Pursue Litigation When Necessary

At the Pennsylvania business law firm of Sidkoff, Pincus & Green our trademark lawyers in Philadelphia have experience representing business clients in claims involving commercial contract issues, intellectual property, trademark infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets, among other business law and commercial litigation matters. We provide experienced legal counsel on how to avoid trademark litigation and on how to pursue a trademark violation claim if one is warranted. Contact our Philadelphia trial lawyers today to schedule a consultation by calling 215-574-0600 or submit an online inquiry.

Philadelphia Overtime Lawyers: Fracking Water Transportation Falls Under FLSA Overtime Rules

By ,

Employees covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) must receive overtime pay for hours worked in excess of 40 in a given workweek at a rate of atleast one and a half times their regular rates of pay.

This month, U.S. District Judge Malachy E. Mannion of the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled in Mazzarella v. Fast Rig Support that truck drivers delivering fracking water to gas drilling rigs within the state are covered by the FLSA and must receive overtime pay in accordance with FLSA guidelines.

After working more than 45 hours a week without receiving overtime pay, the employees of FAST Rig Support, LLC and First Americans Shipping and Trucking Co. filed an FLSA and Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act claim earlier this year. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the claims, arguing that the Motor Carrier Act, which provides exemptions from FLSA regulations, governs work performed by the plaintiffs.

In his ruling, Judge Mannion stated that the plaintiffs effectively pleaded a claim for violations of the overtime provisions of the FLSA and that “defendants have not shown that the motor carrier exemption applies sufficiently to justify dismissal”. Peter Winebrake, counsel for the more than 40 plaintiffs, believes this ruling represents a significant development that will have a broader impact on labor standards in Pennsylvania.

Philadelphia employment lawyers for FLSA at Sidkoff, Pincus and Green P.C.  represent clients in all matters of employment law including wage and hour disputes, FLSA violations, overtime claims and more.  Our Philadelphia business lawyers are highly skilled in trial litigation and complex negotiations.  Contact Sidkoff, Pincus and Green online or call today at 215-574-0600.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers: Contract Law

By ,

In Pennsylvania, courts will look at the “four corners of the document” to determine the intent of the parties when an issue arises with a provision in the contract. Generally, any evidence of previous oral or written negotiations or agreement involving the same subject matter as the contract is almost always inadmissible to explain or vary the terms of the contract. Yocca v. Pittsburgh Steelers Sports, Inc., 854 A.2d 425, 436 (Pa. 2004). This is called the parol evidence rule.

In Yocca, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reiterated that one exception to the parol evidence rule is that prior oral or written negotiations or agreements regarding a contract may be introduced to “vary a writing meant to be the parties’ entire contract where a party avers that a term was omitted from the contract because of fraud, accident, or mistake.” Another exception to allow parol evidence is to explain or clarify ambiguous terms of a contract. Id.

Philadelphia contract lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. are experienced in handing all aspects of business law and commercial litigation. Our dedicated team of commercial contract attorneys in Philadelphia assist clients in a wide range of complex litigation matters, including breach of contract. Call us at 215-574-0600 to schedule a consultation or submit an online contact form.

Philadelphia Whistleblower Lawyers : Vanguard Accused of $1 Billion Tax Fraud

By ,

The city of Philadelphia is home to one of the most active jurisdictions for Qui Tam lawsuits. A Quit Tam suit is a type of lawsuit brought by a third party whistleblower on behalf of the government. In the United States, under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., “an individual with knowledge past or present of fraud committed against the federal government may bring suit its behalf”. If their case recovers funds for the government, a whistleblower can be awarded substantial sums of money as a percentage of the settlement.

Pennsylvania based investment company Vanguard Group, which manages nearly $3 trillion in assets, is currently in the midst of a qui tam suit brought by its former employee David Danon, who alleges that the company illegally manipulated transfer pricing to keep costs artificially low. Danon’s suit states that after expressing serious concerns about the transfer pricing arrangements, the company brushed aside his concerns and eventually fired him.

Vanguard filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that as a former tax attorney for the company, Danon cannot file suit against them. Furthermore, Vanguard alleges that Danon improperly used privilege and confidential information to bring the suit.

The lead counsel in Danon’s suit, Stephen Sorenson of Thomas, Alexander & Forrester LLP remains optimistic about the suit, stating in an interview with Forbes Magazine that he is hoping for a hearing by early next year. The suit alleges a violation of federal and state tax laws, costing taxpayers more than $1 billion.

Philadelphia qui tam lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus and Green represent third party whistleblowers throughout Philadelphia and New Jersey.  If you or someone you know needs a whistleblower lawyer in Philadelphia call Sidkoff, Pincus and Green at 215-574-0600, or complete and online contact form to schedule a consultation today.

Philadelphia Wage and Hour Lawyers: FLSA Overtime Lawsuit

By ,

A Third Circuit judge ruled in March that a driver for Eastern Armored Services Inc., who filed a collective action lawsuit against her employer, is entitled to collect overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  The plaintiff claimed that her employer had improperly classified her as ineligible for overtime pay under the Motor Carrier Act (MCA) Exemption of the FLSA.  The MCA exemption applies to drivers of commercial vehicles weighing more than 10,000 lbs. and other employees whose maximum hours of work are determined by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

The Third Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiff who claimed that she was eligible for overtime pay under the 2008 Corrections Act which deems motor carrier employees who drive vehicles weighing less than 10,000 lbs., during part or all of their working hours, eligible for overtime.  The plaintiff in this case spent 51% of her working days in a vehicle weighing more than 10,000 lbs. and 49% of her total days working in a vehicle weighing less than 10,000 lbs.

Philadelphia overtime lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green are a team of highly skilled litigators representing clients in wage and hour disputes, collective action, and class action lawsuits.  Contact Sidkoff, Pincus & Green online or call 215-574-0600 to discuss your employment law case with a reputable Philadelphia wage and hour lawyer.