Jump to Navigation

Wilmington Sexual Harassment Attorneys

Decades ago, sexual harassment was a regular and normal occurrence in the workplace across all industries. Not only that, but it was an accepted form of interaction between colleagues and supervisors. Today, the laws provide protection for those who are victims of any type of sexual harassment at work. Sexual harassment will likely persist, but rest assured there are laws and attorneys dedicated to helping employees.

At Martin D. Haverly, Attorney at Law, we are such a firm. Our firm has represented Delaware employees for more than 19 years in sexual harassment and discrimination claims. We also represent clients pro hac vice in a variety of other states. While our tradition of providing legal guidance for employees continues, we also advise employers in such matters, helping them to take the correct steps necessary to resolve harassment claims.

Sexual harassment most often falls into either of two categories:

  • Quid pro quo: In this type of sexual harassment, there is a proposed exchange — a sexual favor for a raise/promotion/other positive benefit or in exchange for not being fired.
  • Hostile work environment: Unwanted gestures, jokes, touching, sending or displaying sexual images, etc., are all examples of things that make the work environment sexually charged and potentially hostile to some.

With any sexual harassment situation, it is important to bring your concerns to the appropriate management person. Even better, speak with a Wilmington sexual harassment lawyer from our firm as soon as possible. We can give you a sense of how to preserve your rights and avoid any pitfalls. It is essential to consult us as soon as possible to avoid losing valuable time.

Delaware Racial Harassment Lawyers

Racial harassment at work is unacceptable and should not be tolerated. Whether you are the victim of racial harassment or you are an employer seeking legal advice on how to manage a harassment issue, we are an effective resource.

Racial discrimination comes in many forms. It can involve racially charged images, words or material. It may be that you were denied employment or fired based on your race. Whatever the specific issue, we have the experience and knowledge necessary to address your needs.

Contact Us Today — We Serve Clients Throughout Delaware

At Martin D. Haverly, Attorney at Law, our employment law team is here to support you. Contact us at 302-529-0121 to arrange an in-person meeting. Our office is conveniently located in the suburbs just outside the city of Wilmington.

View Cases

  • Sheridan v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 100 F.3d 1061 (3rd Cir. 1996) (en banc) (Plaintiff's jury verdict and the "pretext only" paradigm for proof of intentional discrimination established).
  • Hawkins v. Division of State Police, et al., C.A. No. 99-297-SLR (Religious discrimination case which successfully obtained an offer of judgment and caused the State to stop using the MMPI-1.
  • Miller v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., C. A. No. 01-827-JJF (D.Del. 2003) (Race Discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Panaro v. J.C. Penny, Inc., C.A. 01C-02-010 JOH, 2002 WL 130692 (Del. Super. 2002)(In a personal injury case, admission into evidence of direct examination of deceased deponent/plaintiff does not.
  • Price, et al. v. L. Aaron Chaffinch, et al., C.A. No. 04-956-GMS, 2006 WL 1313178 (D.Del. 2006) (First Amendment Retaliation, Petitions Clause and Defamation Claims survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Reyes v. Freebery, 141 Fed. Appx. 49 (3d Cir. 2005) (per curiam) remanding to District Court to explain its restrictions on the public's right to access to judicial records and counsel's First Amendment.
  • Underwood v. Sear Roebuck and Co., 343 F.Supp.2d 259 (D.Del. 2004) (Gender discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Shotzberger v. State of Delaware Dept. Of Correction, 2004 WL 758354 (D.Del. Jan. 30, 2004) (Gender discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgement).
  • Stull v. Thomas S. Neuberger, P.A., 2003 WL 21481016 (Del. Super. Febr. 28, 2003) (Effect of Delaware accord and satisfaction law on a contract for legal services).
View More Cases

Case Evaluation Form

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy