Jump to Navigation

View Cases

In the Judeo-Christian tradition there is a famous account of a young shepherd named David going out into battle against a giant soldier named Goliath. Goliath was a highly experienced soldier outfitted with the best armor and weapons of the day. It was assumed by everyone that he was invincible and to go out against him with only a slingshot was certain suicide. But David went out to fight the giant, confident he was doing what was right. And at the end of the day, Goliath was dead.

This firm has taken on many "giants" over the years, and lists of some of those companies and cases can be viewed by clicking on the following links:

Employers Sued by the Firm

The firm is not afraid to file lawsuits against large employers. Some of the employers sued by the firm include the following:

  • American Express
  • American Insurance Company (AIG)
  • American Life Insurance Company (ALICO)
  • Borough of Mt. Carmel
  • City of Wilmington
  • DaimlerChrysler
  • Delaware Department of Corrections
  • Delaware State Police
  • Delmarva Power & Light
  • DuPont Company
  • F. Schumacher & Co.
  • K-Mart
  • New Castle County
  • New Castle County Police Department
  • Sears Roebuck & Co.
  • State of Delaware
  • State of Delaware Department of Corrections
  • State of Delaware Police Department
  • W. L. Gore & Associates

The listing of any of these employers should not be considered a statement that any of these employers engaged in discriminatory practices and/or agreed to any settlement with the employee represented by the firm. These employers are simply listed to indicate that the firm is not afraid to sue large employers or governments.

Representative 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 test and begin using the MMPI-2 test for psychiatric testing of Delaware State Troopers).

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 infringe upon defendant's right of confrontation or cross-examination where defendant's counsel conducted nearly one and a half hours of discovery deposition cross examination of deponent/plaintiff prior to deponent/plaintiff's death).
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 right to be free of prior restraints.

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 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

Review Us