NOTE: CASE RESULTS DEPEND ON A VARIETY OF UNIQUE FACTORS AND DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT SIMILAR RESULTS FOR FUTURE CASES.
In an age discrimination suit that was resolved through mediation, FH+H Partner Kevin Byrnes obtained a highly favorable settlement that addressed the issue of whether the executive should be treated as an employee under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), rather than an agent or independent contractor.
After successfully arguing that the individual, who also served as the general counsel of the organization, worked primarily as an employee, the parties agreed to a severance compensation package and lifetime achievement award.
Mr. Byrnes effectively presented evidence that the termination violated the District of Columbia Human Rights Act. The matter was settled after federal suit was filed.
Click here to learn more about Mr. Byrnes’ law practice.
FH+H Partner Kevin Byrnes successfully represented an army physician who suffered a traumatic brain injury against job termination for errors in travel submissions.
In an action involving an experienced physician who suffered a work-related injury, Mr. Byrnes blunted an effort to terminate the physician based on issues related to the physician’s recall of events, which was affected by his traumatic brain injury that occurred in a workplace-related accident.
Mr. Byrnes successfully argued that the conduct was related to the physical impairment, and the employer should mitigate punishment, since the conduct was disability related and out of the ordinary for what was otherwise an unblemished career.
To learn about FH+H’s Litigation and Investigations Practice, click here.
FH+H Partner Kevin Byrnes helped a federal law enforcement agent reach settlement in a case involving the agent’s supervisor subjecting them to an improper fitness for duty examination.
The client said their supervisor made inappropriate comments about when the client would retire. When the client protested the comments, the supervisor retaliated, which culminated in the improper fitness for duty examination.
The supervisor argued that the client has a physical injury that made them unable to do their job. It was decided, however, that the client’s physical injury was not incapacitating.
The client argued to the EEOC that the examination violated the Rehabilitation Act and was part of a retaliatory scheme.
During the pendency of the claims, the agent reached mandatory retirement. The supervisor then settled for backpay and a partial payment of attorney’s fees.
FH+H Partner Kevin Byrnes successfully defended a federal employee facing a security clearance denial based on the employee allegedly failing to report prior alcohol-related incidents in their security questionnaire.
The employee did not report several prior alcohol-related incidents on their SF-86 Security Questionnaire. Mr. Byrnes helped the employee provide written and oral statements to explain that the employee thought the juvenile matters has been expunged and did not need to be reported.
The denial was overturned, and the employee was able to obtain the security clearance.
Read more FH+H client success stories here.
FH+H Partner Milt Johns intervened in a Government Accountability Office (GAO) protest on behalf of a client who was awarded a federal contract that was then challenged by a competitor.
Mr. Johns filed a motion to dismiss the protest, after which, the competitor voluntarily withdrew their protest.
The FH+H Government Contracts team, led by Mr. Johns, guides middle-market government contractors through the maze of applicable rules and regulations to enable corporate success, now and in the future.
Read more about FH+H's Government Contracts Practice Group here.
A retired Army Green Beret serving in the civil service faced job termination and loss of security clearance. FH+H Senior Counsel and former senior Army official Dean Popps initially shaped issues surrounding this time-sensitive matter for the client, allowing an efficient, timely, and cost-effective engagement with FH+H Partner Dave Jonas.
Mr. Jonas successfully negotiated a resignation rather than a termination, and the client’s security clearance remained intact.
Mr. Jonas’ performance on behalf of his client is indicative of FH+H’s depth and breadth in terms of dealing with the government’s legal, organizational, and bureaucratic structures, and how to work within that milieu to win for the client.
Mr. Jonas noted that the practice of employment law inside the beltway is unique, and FH+H practitioners may often provide a critical advantage to a client.
Read about Mr. Jonas' experience and legal practice here.
Partner Milt Johns and Counsel Jill Helwig of the FH+H Business Litigation team settled a dispute among owners in a close-hold business, where the FH+H-represented parties achieved all of their business goals.
The FH+H Business Litigation team handles all aspects of professional dispute resolution, including defending individuals and corporate entities against law suits in State and Federal courts across the nation, representing clients’ interests beyond final judgment and through the appeals process, and providing clients early advice to avoid litigation altogether.
Read more about the FH+H litigation team here.
The FH+H Litigation and Investigations team, led by Partner Craig Guthery, represented an out-of-state lawyer in an omnibus sanctions motion against plaintiff attorneys pending in federal court in Virginia. U.S. District Court Judge Claude Hilton denied the motion and imposed no sanctions against Mr. Guthery’s client.
The FH+H Litigation and Investigations team handles all aspects of professional dispute resolution, including defending individuals and corporate entities against lawsuits in State and Federal courts across the nation, representing clients’ interests beyond final judgment and through the appeals process, and providing clients early advice to avoid litigation altogether.
Read more about the team here.
On behalf of a small business client, Partner Milt Johns and Associate Rachel Leahey of the FH+H Government Contracts team settled an invoicing dispute with a government agency that resulted in a high six-figure payment to the client.
The FH+H Government Contracts team guides contractors through the maze of applicable rules and regulations to enable corporate success.
Read more about how the team can help clients here.
In a recent arbitration, FH+H Partner Kevin Byrnes prevailed on behalf of a private daycare against a construction company that failed to complete work under a service contract.
The daycare wanted to improve the quality of the school under a D.C. set-aside program that provided loans for just that purpose, but the contractor failed to complete the work in a timely fashion and left the worksite unclean.
The contractor said the daycare’s requirement that the company not work during facility hours caused the delay and denied that the workers failed to maintain the cleanliness of the worksite.
The daycare facility presented pictures and text messages to confirm that the contractor had lacked diligence in the set work schedule and had left the conditions of the facility unsafe for the children in attendance - who were as young as six months.
The arbitrator rejected the contractor’s defenses, awarding the daycare with damages to complete the project and handle cleaning fees and the costs of arbitration.