-
GJ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVNIA
ANDREW FISCHER 1103 Tannerie Run Road Ambler, PA 19002
Plaintiff
v.
PEPPER HAMILTON, LLP 3000 Two Logan Square 18th and Arch Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Defendant
Civil Action
No. 15-cv- 1 5
COMPLAINT Jury Trial Demanded
2413
Plaintiff, Andrew Fischer, Prose hereby files the within
complaint against
defendant Pepper Hamilton, LLP for violations of the Americans
With
Disabilities Act, and in support thereof avers as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. This action for declaratory, injunctive, monetary and
other
appropriate relief is brought by Plaintiff, Andrew Fischer, to
redress intentional
violations by his employer the Defendant, Pepper Hamilton, LLP,
of rights
secured to him by the laws of the United States of America.
2. This action arises under the Americans With Disabilities Act,
42
U.S.C. 12101, et seq. (as amended by the provisions of the
Americans
1
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 1 of
25
-
With Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008, P.L. 110-325)
(collectively, the
"ADA").
JURISDICTION
3. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 42
U.S.C.
1211 7, both of which provide for original jurisdiction of
Plaintiffs claims
arising under the laws of the United States and over actions to
recover
damages and to secure equitable and other relief under the
appropriate
governing statute.
4. Plaintiff has exhausted all administrative remedies and has
taken
all other steps necessary to bring this action before this
Court, having filed a
timely complaint of disability discrimination in employment with
the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC Docket No.
530-2014-02140]
and having received the requisite Notice of Right to Sue to
bring this action
before this Court. See, Notice of Right to Sue attached hereto
as Exhibit "A".
VENUE
5. All actions complained of herein occurred within the
jurisdiction of this Court and involve a Defendant that is
domiciled within its jurisdictional limits.
6. Venue is accordingly invoked pursuant to the dictates of 28
U.S.C.
139l(b) and 1391(c).
2
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 2 of
25
-
PARTIES
7. Plaintiff, Andrew Fischer ("Plaintiff' or "Fischer"), is an
adult
individual who resides at 1103 Tannerie Run Road, Ambler, PA
19002.
8. Defendant Pepper Hamilton, LLP ("Pepper," "Defendant," or
the
"Firm") is a Limited Liability Partnership duly organized under
the laws of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its principal place of
business located at
3000 Two Logan Square, 18th and Arch Streets, Philadelphia, PA
19103.
9. Defendant Pepper is an Employer within the definition
established
by the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act as
amended by the
provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Amendments Act of
2008, P.L.
110-325 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
10. After receiving a Bachelors of Arts degree in Government and
Law
from Lafayette College in June 1991 and a Juris Doctor from
Villanova
University School of Law in May 1994, Fischer worked first as
in-house counsel
at About Time, Inc. until approximately June 1997 then, from
June 1997 until
July 2001 as a solo practitioner. From July 2001 until August
2002, Fischer
was an associate at Murland and Nathan, LLC and, from November
2002 until
August 2006, Fischer was again in solo practice and performed
contract legal
work.
11. In August 2006, Fischer was hired by Pepper as a project
lawyer
working in Pepper's main office at Two Logan Square, receiving
an hourly rate
for hours he worked that could be billed to clients and minimal
benefits.
3
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 3 of
25
-
12. When Fischer was hired by Pepper, the firm's facilities
operated
around the clock, seven days per week and, other than having to
take one hour
of mandatory break time for every eight hours that they billed,
project lawyers . were not limited in the amount of hours they
could bill in a day, week, or
month or when during the day they worked.
13. During this time, Fischer generally arrived at work between
1 :00
p.m. and 3:00 p.m. and would work until 12:20 a.m. or later
during the work
week and on weekends, which permitted him to bill an average of
more than 45
hours per week.
14. On or about March 2007, Fischer was first told that he
needed to
be at work during core business hours, but he was still
permitted to work a
flexible schedule, permitting him to bill an average of almost
40 hours per week
during 2007.
15. In early 2007, Fischer experienced chronic difficulties
falling asleep
at night and arising for work in the morning, and on or about
October 2007, he
was diagnosed with Delayed Sleep-Phase Disorder, which
substantially limits
Fischer in the major life activity of sleeping and is a
"disability" as defined in the ADA.
16. On or about October 2007 Fischer was notified by his
supervisor,
Matthew Hamilton ("Hamilton"), that he needed to be at work
during the hours
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
1 7. In response, Fischer notified Hamilton that his late
arrivals may be
due to a medical condition and that he was scheduled to see a
doctor about it.
4
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 4 of
25
-
18. On or about August 2008, after it discovered billing
fraud
committed by a contract lawyer it had engaged (said contract
lawyer having
continued to bill and was paid for approximately 8 months after
he stopped
showing-up or working at Pepper), Pepper hired Nadine Overton
("Overton") to
assist Hamilton with reviewing timesheets and personnel issues,
and
supervising project lawyers.
19. On or about August 2008, Fischer was selected by Pepper to
be
one of their project lawyers assigned to supervise a team of
contract lawyers at
a remote site at Liberty Place ("Liberty Place Location").
20. For the next approximately 38 months, Fischer did most of
his
work for Pepper at the Liberty Place Location.
21. On or about September 8, 2008, Pepper placed a ten (10) hour
cap
on the daily hours a project lawyer could work, unless he or she
was working
on a special project that specifically authorized additional
hours.
22. Additionally, as another response to the contract lawyer's
billing
fraud, Pepper changed the work hours for contract lawyers and
project lawyers,
limiting them to working between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
23. In December 2008, Mr. Fischer formally notified his
direct
supervisor Hamilton of his diagnosis of Delayed Sleep-Phase
Disorder, and the
fact that his conditions required a reasonable accommodation
regarding the
time he was expected to report to work.
5
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 5 of
25
-
24. Hamilton requested that Fischer provide certification from
his
doctor of his condition and the need for an accommodation, which
certification
Fischer provided.
25. On or about January 2009, Pepper announced that monthly
hours
for project lawyers and contract lawyers would be capped at
200.
26. On or about March 2009, Fischer provided Pepper with a
letter
from his physician certifying his diagnosis of Delayed Sleep
Phase Disorder and
his need for a reasonable accommodation.
27. In March 2009, Pepper granted Fischer the accommodation
of
permitting him to report to work later than the normal starting
time, but told
Fischer that he would have to end his work day by 7:00 p.m.,
an
accommodation that, given the Firm's mandatory break time and
the
limitations imposed by his disability, did not provide Fischer
with the ability to
bill at least 40 hours per week unless he worked seven (7) days
a week, and did
not provide Fischer with the ability to bill the number of hours
per month the
non-disabled project attorneys billed or the ability to take
time off during the week for things like doctors' appointments as
the non-disabled project attorneys could.
28. On or about November 2009, Pepper prohibited project
attorneys
from performing weekend work except on special projects, further
limiting the number of hours Mr. Fischer could bill per week.
29. On or about December 7, 2009, Fischer made a written request
to
Hamilton that, as an accommodation to his disability, he be
permitted to work
6
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 6 of
25
-
until 9:50 p.m. or that he be permitted to work remotely from
his home for a
few hours per night so he could have the same billing
opportunities as the non-
disabled project attorneys.
30. Hamilton told Fischer orally that he would be permitted to
work
past 7 p.m. and Fischer began working until approximately 9:50
p.m.
31. On or about December 29, 2009, Overton sent Fischer an
email
inquiring if he was allowed to work past 7 p.m. as she had not
been aware that
Hamilton had authorized Mr. Fischer to do so and Hamilton
responded that
Fischer may work up until 8:30 p.m. when necessary.
32. Because of the limitations imposed by his disability and the
further
limitations placed on the hours he could work, Fischer was only
able to bill
approximately 29.3 hours per week in 2009 and approximately 30.1
hours per
week in 2010.
33. On or about January 2011, Brian Cleghorn ("Cleghorn")
was
formally introduced to the project team as Overton's replacement
(Overton
. having departed Pepper in 2010) in assisting Hamilton with
timesheets and
personnel matters, and became an additional supervisor of
Fischer.
34. On or about August 2011, Fischer received his Master of
Science
in Biotechnology degree from The Johns Hopkins University, and
Fischer (a
registered Patent Attorney) was, therefore, qualified to assist
with Pepper's
patent work.
35. Fischer requested that he be permitted to work with
attorneys in
the Intellectual Property ("IP'') Department in addition to his
Health Effects
7
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 7 of
25
-
project work and was put in touch with Raymond Miller ("Miller")
an attorney in the IP Department who worked out of Pepper's
Pittsburgh office.
36. On or about October 19, 2011, the Liberty Place Location
closed,
the contract lawyers were dismissed, and the project lawyers
(including
Fischer) were instructed to report to Pepper's main facility the
next day to
continue working.
37. On or about October 20, 2011, Cleghorn called Fischer into
his
office at Two Logan Square and informed Fischer that he would no
longer be
permitted to work past 7 p.m. because Cleghorn didn't want to be
"hassled" by
other employees at the Two Logan Square location who would learn
that
Fischer was permitted to work past 7 p.m., and then would
request similar
permission for themselves.
38. That Fischer was permitted to work past 7:00 p.m. was an
open
secret of sorts at the Liberty Place Location but it was
generally not known
among the employees at Pepper's main facility.
39. After Cleghorn again called Mr. Fischer into his office the
next day
and again reiterated that Fischer would no longer be permitted
to work past 7
p.m., Fischer repeatedly requested an adequate reasonable
accommodation,
but was refused.
40. Throughout this time, Cleghorn repeatedly mocked Fischer
and
made deprecating comments about Fischer's disability and his
request for an
accommodation.
8
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 8 of
25
-
41. Beginning on or about October 21, 2011, the
accommodation
previously granted Fischer was rescinded and he was only
permitted to work
until 7 p.m.
42. In response, Fischer complained to Hamilton that he was
being
denied a reasonable accommodation for his disability and
informed Hamilton
about Cleghorn's outrageous and unprofessional conduct towards
him.
43. Instead of responding to and remedying the issues Fischer
raised,
Hamilton questioned Fischer's formerly recognized disability and
refused to
grant any accommodation or address in any way Cleghorn's
improper conduct
toward Fischer.
44. Rather than being disciplined for his outrageous and
unprofessional
conduct towards Fischer, Cleghorn was instead subsequently
promoted.
45. On or about November 30, 2011, Fischer met with Miller to
discuss
Fischer splitting his time between doing project work in the
Health Effects department and working in the IP Department.
46. At his meeting with Miller, Fischer disclosed his sleep
disorder and
his need to work late, to which Miller responded that Fischer's
work time needs
could not only be accommodated, they would be a benefit to his
work in the IP
Department.
47. While Miller informed Fischer that he did want Fischer to
work
with him, and actually sent Fischer an IP/patent assignment on
which to work,
in retaliation for Fischer's repeated requests for a reasonable
accommodation
9
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 9 of
25
-
and complaint about Cleghorn's improper conduct, Hamilton
refused to
approve Miller's request that Fischer do work with the IP
Department.
48. Because of the limitations imposed by his disability and the
further
limitations placed on the hours he could work Fischer only
billed
approximately 26.4 hours per week in 2011.
49. On or about February 26, 2012, Fischer's physician, Michael
I.
Turk ("Dr. Turk"), certified that Fischer was being treated for
Delayed Sleep
Phase Disorder, Attention Deficit Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder
NOS, all
conditions that substantially limit Fischer in the major life
activity of sleeping
and all of which are "disabilities" as defined in the ADA, and
stated that
Fischer required the accommodation of permitting him to arrive
at work later
than the normal starting time.
50. Dr. Turk specifically stated that Fischer was "likely to
arrive
between 11:30 am and 1 pm" (which he hoped to adjust upward with
"further
adjustments of his medications") and requested that Mr. Fischer
be permitted
to work until 9:00 and be permitted to have a meal break during
his work day.
51. Fischer delivered the February 26, 2012 letter from Dr. Turk
to
Patricia Woodson ("Woodson"), Pepper's Head of Administration
and Human
Resources.
52. On or about March 13 2012, Fischer emailed Hamilton
again
requesting an adequate reasonable accommodation that would give
him billing
opportunity parity with his coworkers without disabilities,
including the
possibility of billing up to 10 hours a day, capped at 200 per
month.
10
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 10 of
25
-
53. Hamilton responded that Fischer would now be permitted to
work
until 8 p.m. in Health Effects but would not be permitted split
his time with the
IP Department, despite the desire of attorneys in the IP
Department to have Mr.
Fischer work with them, and that Fischer could continue to
arrive late,
provided that he email Cleghorn regarding any arrival after 12
noon.
54. On or about March 21, 2012, Fischer corresponded with
Hamilton,
again requesting a reasonable accommodation that would give him
the same
billing opportunities as his co-workers without disabilities,
but Hamilton
refused to extend the "accommodation" previously granted any
further.
55. Fischer continued to press Pepper for an accommodation
that
would permit him to work the same number of hours other project
lawyers were permitted to work and, in furtherance of that effort,
Mr. Fischer met with
Woodson and Lori Brekus, another member of Pepper's Human
Resource team
in early April 2012.
56. After their meeting, Woodson informed Fischer that, given
his
doctor's assertion that he was "likely to arrive" between 11:30
a.m. and 1:00
p.m., he would be expected to arrive between those hours and he
could work
until 8:00 p.m., taking only a half-hour break instead of the
usual 1 hour
mandatory break, and specifically noting that if he arrived
between noon and 1
p.m. this schedule would permit him to work between 32.5 and
37.5 hours per
week depending upon his arrival time.
57. Fischer did not agree that this proposed accommodation gave
him
parity with his non-disabled co-workers as the other project
lawyers were
11
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 11 of
25
-
permitted to bill up to 10 hours per day and were given a 12
hour billing
window and a full hour lunch break, but agreed to follow
Woodson's guidelines
as his condition allowed to see if his issues were
addressed.
58. On or about April 17, 2012, Fischer also made a formal
request to
Nina Gussack, the attorney who headed Pepper's Health Effects
department,
was chair of Pepper's Executive Committee, and was on Pepper's
diversity
committee, for assistance in obtaining an accommodation that
would provide
him with the same billing opportunities as his non-disabled
co-workers.
59. At the same time Mr. Fischer again contacted Woodson,
noting
that the accommodation proposed by Pepper was based on the
mitigating
effects of medication Mr. Fischer was no longer taking and again
requested that
he be permitted to work past 8:00 p.m. as an accommodation to
his disability,
or that he be permitted to telecommute for a period of time as
at least two of
his non-disabled co-workers had been permitted to do, but
neither of these
requests was granted.
60. Fischer met with Woodson two more times in spring 2012 to
again
press for an adequate accommodation that would give him billing
opportunity
parity with his non-disabled co-workers, but Woodson told him
that he could
not work past 8 p.m. because he needed to be supervised and that
Pepper did
not need him to work past 8 p.m.
61. On or about September 2012, Fischer observed Lorraine
Holley
("Holley''), a contract attorney at Pepper whose desk was
located about 15 feet
from Fischer's, work past 8 pm.
12
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 12 of
25
-
62. On or about September 28, 2012 Holley stated to Fischer that
she
was allowed to work as late as she wanted and could work on
weekends if she
so chose.
63. On or about October 5, 2012 Fischer met with Woodson and
made
a formal complaint regarding Hamilton's treatment of him,
including
Hamilton's refusal to provide an adequate accommodation and his
retaliatory
actions in limiting Fischer's hours and prohibiting him from
working with the
IP Department.
64. On or about October 16, 2012, Fischer met with attorney
Tracey
Diamond ("Diamond"), another member of Pepper's Human Resource
team
regarding his complaint against Hamilton.
65. On or about November 13, 2012, Fischer provided Diamond
updated medical information from Dr. Turk that confirmed
Fischer's disability
and stated that he was unable to arrive at work before noon and
his arrival
time at work would "likely be between 12 Noon and 2 pm and would
depend on
his current functioning."
66. On or about November 21, 2012, Fischer met with Diamond
and
Woodson, at which time Diamond informed Mr. Fischer that he was
granted a
revised accommodation that required Mr. Fischer to arrive
between 12 noon
and 2 p.m., even though Dr. Turk's letter stated that 12 noon to
2 p.m. was
only his "likely'' arrival time.
13
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 13 of
25
-
67. At that meeting, Diamond refused to address Fischer's
complaint
against Hamilton, stating that his complaint was "not
corroborated" but
refusing to discuss any details with him.
68. On or about November 21, 2012, Diamond formally informed
Fischer (via emailed memorandum) that Pepper would adjust
the
accommodation offered to Fischer by:
a. permitting him to arrive at work between Noon and 2:00 p.m.
and
work at the office until 8:00 p.m.;
b. permitting him telecommute for up to two hours per day to
make
up for time he missed between noon and 2 p.m.
c. permitting him to forego meal breaks, but was also permitted
to
take one if he chose;
d. warning him that he was expected to arrive at work no later
than
2:00 p.m., unless his absence or tardiness was supported by a
doctor's note or
other documentation of the reason for the tardiness or absence;
and
e. warning him that, if he failed to arrive by 2:00 p.m. or
provide the
required documentation, he would be "subject to discipline under
applicable Firm policies."
69. Woodson sought and obtained clarification regarding the
accommodation Fischer needed directly from Fischer's physician,
Dr. Turk,
who stated that Fischer might reasonably arrive at Pepper as
late as 4 p.m.
because of his disability, but Woodson refused to make any
adjustments to his
14
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 14 of
25
-
approved "accommodation" even to permit him to make up bathroom
breaks by
telecommuting an extra .40 hour each night.
70. In 2012, Fischer only billed approximately 19 hours per
week.
71. In early January 2013, Fischer started a new medication
that
prevented him from arriving by 2:00 p.m. and, as required, he
informed
Cleghorn of his late arrival and the reason for it by e-mail on
January 4, 2013.
72. On January 7, 2013, Woodson e-mailed Fischer noting his
late
arrival the previous work day and demanding that he submit a
supporting
doctor's note excusing his tardiness by the end of that week, or
his tardiness
would be considered an unexcused tardiness.
73. On or about January 11, 2013, Fischer obtained a doctor's
note
excusing his tardiness for January 4, 2013 and hand-delivered it
to Woodson.
74. Thereafter, Pepper continued to refuse to make any
additional
adjustments to the "accommodation" granted to Fischer and,
claiming that Dr.
Turk's explanation of his condition and need for accommodation
was "vague,"
required Fischer to participate in an Independent Medical Exam
("IME").
75. During the weekends of January 5-6 and January 12-13,
2013,
project lawyers working on the project to which Fischer was
assigned were specifically granted permission to work on those
weekend days so Fischer
worked from 2:45 p.m. on Sunday January 6 to 12:21 a.m. on
January 7 and
from 6:50 p.m. on Saturday January 12 to 1:26 a.m. on Sunday
January 13.
76. After she reviewed his time records for those dates, Woodson
sent
Fischer a second warning notice on January 24, 2013 informing
him that, even
15
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 15 of
25
-
when permitted to work on weekend days, he was required to
adhere to the
between 12 Noon and 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. schedule specified in
his
"accommodation."
77. In the January 24, 2012 warning notice Woodson also
instructed
Mr. Fischer that, if he did decide to work on holidays (which
was optional at
Pepper), he still was required to arrive at Pepper no later than
2 p.m., a new
requirement that was apparently unique to Mr. Fischer, since his
non-disabled
co-workers who chose to work on holidays were free to arrive at
work at any
time between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
78. In response to Woodson's January 24, 2013 warning,
Fischer
pointed out that the e-mail authorizing the weekend work
specifically stated
that "only the daily and monthly caps apply" and that since he
billed less than
10 hours in a day and would bill less than 200 hours for the
month, he did not
violate the terms of the weekend work authorization.
79. Fischer also pointed out that his staying past 8:00 p.m. did
not
appear to cause any kind of disruption to the firm, let alone
impose an "undue
hardship," and was in fact beneficial to the client in helping
to meet a tight
deadline.
80. Woodson merely replied that Fischer was required to abide by
the
accommodation provided and could not work in the office past
8:00 p.m. on
any day on which he worked, including weekends and holidays.
16
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 16 of
25
-
81. On or about January 31, 2013, Woodson instructed Fischer
to
participate in an Independent Medical Examination by Dr. Sunil
Sharma ("Dr.
Sharma"), a sleep specialist, which he did.
82. The results of the Independent Medical Examination
confirmed
Fischer's disability and the need for a modified work schedule
to accommodate
that disability.
83. On March 1, 2013 in a memorandum, Woodson acknowledged
Dr.
Sharma's findings but refused to modify the "accommodation"
outlined in the
November 21, 2012 Memorandum and went on to warn Fischer
about
"unexcused tardiness" and the need to provide a doctor's note if
he arrived at
work after 2:00 p.m.
84. In the March 1, 2013 memorandum, Woodson also, for the
first
time, informed Fischer that working a full-time (40 hours per
week) schedule
was an "essential function" of his job, even though she had
previously asserted that an accommodation that provided Fischer the
opportunity to bill between
32.5 and 37.5 hours per week was "reasonable."
85. In the March 1, 2013 memorandum, Woodson also, for the
first
time, informed Fischer that, on days when he arrived after 12
noon, he was
required to telecommute each night (up to 2 hours, for the time
he missed
between 12 noon and 2 p.m.) and threatened "further discipline
up to and
including termination from employment" if Fischer arrived at
work after 2:00
p.m. and/or failed to maintain full-time hours.
17
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 17 of
25
-
86. Fischer responded to the March 1, 2013 warning, pointing
out,
inter alia, that he believed the firm's actions in considering
any arrival past
2:00 p.m. without a doctor's note as an unexcused tardiness and
the new
requirement that he bill at least 40 hours per week were imposed
in retaliation
for his request for a reasonable accommodation.
87. Despite Fischer's complaint of retaliation and his request
that
Pepper be more flexible with his work hours, Woodson conveyed to
Fischer that
Pepper would continue to consider any arrival after 2:00 p.m. to
be an
unexcused tardiness and "a performance problem that could result
in
termination of your employment."
88. Fischer continued through counsel to seek an adjustment to
his
"accommodation" that would provide him with the same billing
opportunities
as his non-disabled colleagues, but Pepper refused to discuss
any adjustments
to his schedule or even explain why more flexible hours would be
an undue
hardship to the Firm.
89. By letter dated June 3, 2013, Pepper terminated
Fischer's
employment for failing to "abide by the reasonable accommodation
schedule
that was put into place" for him and because of his "continued
failure to arrive
at work during the accommodated time for arrival."
90. In both August 2007 and August 2008, Mr. Fischer received
an
annual raise, but following his December 2008 request for
accommodation, Mr.
Fischer never received another raise, even though non-disabled
project lawyers
received raises.
18
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 18 of
25
-
91. Like Cleghorn before him, rather than being disciplined for
his
outrageous and unprofessional conduct towards Fischer, Hamilton
was
subsequently promoted (in Hamilton's case, to Partner in
2014).
92. As evidenced by the actions described above, Plaintiff has
been
discriminated against by the Defendant on the basis of his
disability and in
retaliation for his request for a reasonable accommodation in
violation of the
ADA.
93. Defendant Pepper has engaged in a pattern and practice
of
refusing to grant reasonable accommodations to its disabled
employees and of
retaliating against those employees who do request a
reasonable
accommodation.
94. The actions of Defendant Pepper constituted intentional
and
extremely outrageous conduct and Defendant acted recklessly in
deliberate
disregard of the high degree of probability that severe
emotional distress and
other consequential damages would be suffered by Plaintiff.
95. As a direct result of the deliberate, unlawful, outrageous
and
malicious actions of Defendant Pepper, Plaintiff has suffered
and continues to
suffer the loss of specific employment opportunities, earnings,
bonuses,
benefits and earnings potential.
96. In addition, as a direct result of the deliberate, unlawful,
and
outrageous and malicious actions of Defendant Pepper's
management
employees, including but not limited to Matthew Hamilton, Brian
Cleghorn and
Patricia Woodson, Plaintiff has also suffered and continues to
suffer severe
19
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 19 of
25
-
emotional distress, anxiety, depression, humiliation, a loss of
life's pleasures,
the loss of self-esteem, damage to his professional status and
reputation, and a
painful diminution of his ability to provide himself with the
earned rewards of
excellence in his chosen profession, and will continue to suffer
the same into
the future.
97. The actions of Defendant Pepper were outrageous and were
in
blatant disregard of the rights of Plaintiff as protected under
the controlling
statute.
Count I
Defendant Pepper Hamilton, LLP Violated the Americans With
Disabilities Act
{42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq.]
98. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 97
above as
though fully set forth herein.
99. Defendant Pepper Hamilton LLP violated the Americans
With
Disabilities Act, 4 2 U.S. C. 12101, et seq., in that its
management employees
discriminated against Plaintiff because of his disability and
retaliated against
him for requesting a reasonable accommodation, as evidenced by,
inter alia:
a. refusing Plaintiffs request for a reasonable
accommodation
to Plaintiff's disability that would provide him with billing
opportunity parity
with his non-disabled co-workers;
b. permitting Hamilton, Cleghorn and other attorneys who
supervised Plaintiff to make denigrating remarks about
Plaintiffs disablity;
20
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 20 of
25
-
c. knowingly setting requirements as part of the authorized
"accommodation" to his disability that Plaintiffs disability
would not permit
him to meet;
d. imposing restrictions on Plaintiff's work time on
approved
weekends and holidays that were not imposed on Pepper's
non-disabled project
attorneys;
e. refusing to permit him to do work with Pepper's IP
Department in retaliation for his repeated requests for a
reasonable
accommodation that would give him billing opportunity parity
with his non-
disabled co-workers;
f. failing to give Plaintiff any salary increase after he asked
for
a reasonable accommodation while giving salary increases to
Pepper's non-
disabled project attorneys;
g. arbitrarily imposing "essential functions" of his job that
were not considered to be essential functions before Plaintiff
insisted on a
reasonable accommodation that would give him billing opportunity
parity with
his non-disabled co-workers; and
h. terminating his employment for his alleged failure to
meet
job standards that were imposed in retaliation for his requests
for a reasonable accommodation that would provide him with billing
opportunity parity with his
non-disabled co-workers.
21
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 21 of
25
-
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Andrew Fischer, respectfully requests that
this
Court:
{a) Enter a declaratory judgment that the actions of Defendant
Pepper
Hamilton, LLP violated the rights of Plaintiff as secured to him
by the
applicable federal statutes;
{b) Reinstate Plaintiff to a position equivalent to that which
he held at
the time of his termination together with appropriate promotions
and raises;
{c) Award to Plaintiff past and future damages for loss of
income,
growth opportunities and all benefits denied him due to the
improper and
unlawful actions of Defendant;
{d) Award to Plaintiff damages in compensation for his
emotional
distress, humiliation, loss of reputation and status in the
community of his
peers, and the loss of his ability to provide himself with the
rewards of his
years of excellence in his chosen profession as permitted under
the provisions
of the ADA;
{e) Grant to Plaintiff punitive damages as allowed pursuant to
the
ADA;
{f) Grant to Plaintiff costs, disbursements and reasonable
attorneys'
fees; and
22
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 22 of
25
-
(g) Grant to Plaintiff such additional relief as the Court deems
just and proper under the circumstances.
Dated: May 1, 2015
Respectfully submitted,
By: rlnlwr'
23
Andrew Fischer, Prose
1103 Tannerie Run Road Ambler, PA 19002 (215) 588-7526
[email protected]
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 23 of
25
-
EXHIBIT A
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 24 of
25
-
EEOC Form 161(rev2/17/08) U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
DISMISSAL AND NOTICE OF RIGHTS To: Andrew Fischer From: Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission
Philadelphia District Office 1103 Tannerie Run Road Ambler, PA
19002
On behalf of person(s) aggrieved whose identity is CONFIDENTIAL
(29CFR1601.7(a))
801 Market Street, Suite 1300 Philadelphia, PA 19107-3127
Charge No.
530-2014-02140
EEOC Representative
Legal Unit Telephone No.
(215) 440-2828 THE EEOC IS CLOSING ITS FILE ON THIS CHARGE FOR
Tl-IE FOLLOWING REASON:
rhe facts alleged in the charge fail to state a claim under any
of the statutes enforced by the EEOC. Your allegations did not
involve a disability that is covered by the Americans with
Disabilities Act. The Respondent employs less than the required
number of employees or is not otherwise covered by the statues.
Your charge was not timely filed with EEOC. In other words, you
waited too long after the date(s) of the alleged discrimination to
file your charge.
[ X] rhe EEOC issues the following determination: Based upon its
investigation, the EEOC is unable to conclude that the information
obtained establishes violations of the statutes. This does not
certify that the respondent is in compliance with the statutes. No
finding is made as to any other issues that might be construed as
having been raised by this charqe. rhe EEOC has adopted the
findings of the state or local fair employment practices agency
that investigated this charge.
/ L. Other (briefly state)
NOTICE OF SUIT RIGHTS (See the additional information attached
to this form.)
Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and/or the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act: This will be the only notk:e of
dismissal and of your right to sue that we will send you. You may
file a lawsuit against the respondent(s) under federal law based on
this charge iii federal or state court. Your lawsuit must be filed
WITHIN 90 DAYS from your receipt of this Notice; otherwise, your
right to sue based on this charge will be lost. (The time limit for
filing suit based on a state claim may be different.) !
Equal Pay Act (EPA): EPA suits must be filed in federal or state
court within 2 years (3 years for willful violations) of the
alleged EPA underpayment. This means that backpay due for any
violations that occurred more than 2 years (3 years) before you
file suit may not be collectible.
On behalf of the Commission
Enclosure(s) Spencer H. Lewis, Jr., District Director (Date
Mailed) Information Sheet
cc: Pepper Hamilrton Nancy Abrams, Esquire (For Charging Party)
Patricia Woodson, Director of Administration and HR (for
Respondent)
Case 2:15-cv-02413-GJP Document 1 Filed 05/01/15 Page 25 of
25