Ray v. Gray - Firm Jabs Back in Race Discrimination Lawsuit By William Peacock, Esq. on April 17, 2013 12:10 PM
As the nearly two-year-old lawsuit reaches the summary judgment stage, more details about the inflammatory accusations made by John Ray III against BigLaw firm Ropes & Gray, as well as the firm’s defense, are being made public, and at this point in the proceedings, it’s not looking great for Mr. Ray.
Previous reporting by Above The Law brought us the Ray’s story. The ninth-year associate was let go after the firm reportedly felt that his work was well below partnership standards. They also stated that his “fractured relationships with colleagues” and “inappropriate behavior” with subordinates contributed to the decision. That inappropriate behavior allegedly included sleeping with a paralegal.
Ray, on the other hand, accused the firm of treating him, and explicitly asking him to be, their "token black associate" during meetings with clients. He alleged that when he complained about the "token" comment and a "n****r" joke, the firm retaliated by cutting his work, and eventually, cutting him.
Allegedly, the firm deactivated his key card in May 2009 and also reneged on an offer for a letter of recommendation after he filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The new details, courtesy of the ABA Journal, come from Ropes' motion for summary judgment. They allege that they made the decision to let him go, based on the above reasons, in December 2008, but allowed him to continue calling himself a Ropes associate for the following six months while he continued looking for work.
The firm's argument is this: since he had been effectively fired in December 2008, there was no way they could have retaliated in May 2009 for his "groundless" EEOC claim. They also kept their promise to pay him through June.
As for the letter of recommendation, the firm admits that their partner reneged on the offer, as he could not write a letter of recommendation to someone who had filed "a groundless claim for [his] own personal benefit."
The firm also argues that, based on the timing and the effort to secure an $8.5 million settlement before the EEOC claim was filed, "the inference that plaintiff's discrimination case was a post-hoc invention aimed a securing a large sum of money from Ropes & Gray follows inescapably."
Ironically enough, even with the firm's P.R. nightmare of a suit, they were recognized last year as the second most diverse law firm, according to Vault.
Related Resources:
BigLaw Associate Gets Nod to Argue Davila Case to SCOTUS (FindLaw's Greedy Associates Blog)Ex-Quinn Emanuel Staff Attorney Sues Firm for Race Discrimination (FindLaw's Greedy Associates Blog)Dechert Settles Fired Associate's Paternity Leave, FMLA Claims (FindLaw's Greedy Associates Blog)(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));TweetShareThis
Categories: Firm Life Tags: Big Law, discrimination, John Ray III, retaliation, Ropes and Gray
See All FindLaw Blogs >>
Go To Greedy Associates Main Page >>
About Greedy Associates Greedy Associates covers the attorney lifestyle-- from law school to career and everything in between. Have a comment or tip? Write to us.
Subscribe to this blog's feed Subscribe to FindLaw News for Legal Professionals See all FindLaw RSS feeds Popular Topics ABA associate compensation bar exam BigLaw career paths careers ethics firm life humor job market law firm law firms law school law schools law students lawyer networking New York salaries Supreme Court Categories Bar Exam (25) Career Paths (109) FindLaw Answers (11) Firm Life (150) Greedy Stuff (137) Humor (151) Job Market (115) Law School (186) Legal History (10) Money (35) Pop Culture Lawyers (24) Training and CLE (26) Work-Life Balance (41) Archives Select a Month... April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 Search Greedy Associates About this Entry This page contains a single entry by William Peacock, Esq. published on April 17, 2013 12:10 PM.
Helping Locals and Law Students? New Clinic Sounds Like a Winner was the previous entry in this blog.
One Not-So-Good Suit Deserves Another is the next entry in this blog.
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
Research the law Manage your practice Manage your career News and commentary Get Legal Forms About us Cases & Codes / Opinion Summaries / Sample Business Contracts / Research an attorney or law firm Law Technology / Law Practice Management / Law Firm Marketing Services / Corporate Counsel Center Legal Career Job Search / Online CLE / Law Student Resources Legal News Headlines / Law Commentary / Featured Documents / Newsletters / Blogs / RSS Feeds Legal Forms for Your Practice Company History / Media Relations / Contact Us / Advertising / Jobs Copyright ? FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business. All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment