New Hampshire Bar Association
About the Bar
For Members
For the Public
Legal Links
Publications
Newsroom
Online Store
Vendor Directory
NH Bar Foundation
Judicial Branch
NHMCLE

Providing innovative litigation support services in business valuation, financial analyses and forensic accounting to attorneys and clients alike throughout the New England.

Trust your transactions to the only payment solution recommended by over 50 bar associations.
New Hampshire Bar Association
Lawyer Referral Service Law Related Education NHBA CLE NHBA Insurance Agency

Member Login
username and password

Bar News - February 13, 2009


An Employment Discrimination Rap

I was thrilled to see that the January 16 Bar News published a study by The American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (ACS) whose data showed what employment law practitioners have known and experienced for some 20 years: "The federal courts disfavor employment discrimination plaintiffs, who are now forswearing use of those courts."

As a plaintiffís employment law attorney, Iíve cited that study in federal pleadings seeking remand to state court; the data is that shameful.

There are hundreds, and Iíve personally experienced one: "Itís a close call, but summary judgment granted," federal decision in a case defendants removed (a/k/a "yanked") to federal court. If itís a close call, the juryís supposed to decide, not the judge! Paper affidavits upon which summary judgments are granted donít show the witness shifting in his seat, sweating profusely or rolling his eyes, or smirking, all body language recognized world-wide to convey mendacity.

I have testified, written and rapped about (and generally cursed) the "advantage enjoyed by employment case defendants in federal court." Never, I repeat never, has a defense attorney disagreed with my observation of their federal court advantage, (Nor has any federal judge with whom I have dared discuss the topic.) Hereís my 2007 Rap (updated for the 2009 Inauguration) to be chanted to a solid, driving beat:

The federal courts give punishment
by killing claims on summary judgment
for just about each bad excuse
employers have for turning loose
the workers who have dared to tell
their harassing bosses to go to, well...
classes for their sad, bad acts
Ďcuz the feds canít find a dispute of facts!
They know better than the jury--
Why have a trial? Why have that worry?

Defendantsí lawyers love the way,
by removing from the state courts they
explode the costs by (tens of) thousands of dollars.
They get well paid, so they donít holler.

The plaintiffs are fired, so funds are nay,
so itís plaintiffsí attorneys who get no pay.
We labor for weeks on affidavitsí fruition, yet:
"SJ" Granted! (There goes tuition.)

So when removed, we speed-seek remand, but
if itís a diversity case, the feds demand
that plaintiffs promise to not ask for more
than $75 Grand. ("ARGH, OK!" I roar!)

But who will pay the plaintiffsí fees
for freeing the case from the "killer bees"?
"No fees for remand!" the courts here say,
"we could--- but we wonít --
make defendants pay."

Geeze I just do not know why
the federal courts diss the "working guy"
who works and works and works and works
for bosses aptly titled "jerks".

This New Congress WILL help out -
Employees shafted will get clout!
Then JUSTICE IN THE WORKPLACE may be had Ė
and employee advocates will be glad.

Nancy Richards-Stower
Merrimack

Click for directions to Bar events.

Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store
Lawyer Referral Service | Law-Related Education | NHBA•CLE | NHBA Insurance Agency | NHMCLE
Search | Calendar

New Hampshire Bar Association
2 Pillsbury Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301
phone: (603) 224-6942 fax: (603) 224-2910
email: NHBAinfo@nhbar.org
© NH Bar Association Disclaimer