Law Firm Duane Morris Facing Class Action Over Alleged Partner Misclassification Scheme, Discriminatory Pay
Garland v. Duane Morris, LLP et al.
Filed: August 31, 2024 ◆§ 3:24-cv-01783
A class action accuses Duane Morris of intentionally misclassifying non-equity lawyers as partners and failing to provide equal pay to female, non-white attorneys.
California
A proposed class action lawsuit against Duane Morris, LLP accuses the law firm of intentionally misclassifying non-equity lawyers as partners and failing to provide equal pay to female, non-white attorneys.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.
The 45-page lawsuit alleges Duane Morris and affiliate Tax Accounting Group have orchestrated a scheme to maximize profit, reduce business expenses and minimize tax obligations for equity partners by illegally shifting those burdens to non-equity partners. As part of this alleged misclassification scheme, Duane Morris gives attorneys the title of partner but excludes them from sharing in equity partner profits or having significant influence over the firm’s decisions, the complaint claims.
“The firm’s equity partners are the only bona fide partners of the firm for both employment and tax law purposes; non-equity partners are not bona fide partners,” the case says.
The plaintiff, a Black, female employment lawyer at Duane Morris’s San Diego office, contends that despite a “promotion” to non-equity partner in January 2021, her responsibilities and role at the firm did not change. The woman was not included as a member of the firm’s partners board; assigned any managerial duties; or permitted to partake in the firm’s profits, losses or liabilities, the suit shares. Per the filing, the plaintiff remained supervised by multiple managerial layers, and both her compensation and continued employment were entirely at the discretion of the partners board.
The only change the plaintiff claims to have experienced after her “promotion” was a reduction in her effective pay, as, according to the complaint, Duane Morris began improperly withholding certain business expenses from her salary.
The lawsuit further alleges that the plaintiff is a victim of Duane Morris’s discriminatory pay practices.
“Duane Morris’s male-dominated, mostly-White Executive Committee determines compensation for all attorneys, including non-equity partners, and does so in an opaque, even blackbox fashion,” the complaint relays. “The secrecy about how compensation decisions are made only reinforces the pay inequity and enables the firm to continually disfavor female and non-White attorneys in favor of male and White attorneys.”
The plaintiff says she had 12 years of employment law experience under her belt when Duane Morris hired her in 2018. According to the case, her starting salary was $20,000 less than what a white, second-year employment associate made when they first joined the firm in 2022.
Despite consistently receiving “glowing” reviews for her expertise, the plaintiff continued to face a widening pay gap compared to her white, male counterparts, the suit contends.
For instance, in 2023, a white, male employment partner in California with the same billing rate as the plaintiff was paid almost double her compensation and double her bonus, the complaint notes. That same year, another white, male partner with five fewer years of experience earned $165,000 more than the plaintiff, the case says.
The Duane Morris lawsuit looks to represent the following classes:
“All attorneys who held the title of non-equity partner at Duane Morris at any time wherein they were not simultaneously members of the Duane Morris Partners Board during the statutory period until commencement of trial (or such other time as ordered by the Court);”
“All California employees who were not equity partners, not members of the Partners Board, and who incurred reasonable business expenses for home internet use, home office use, necessary office supplies, use of their personal computers/printers/scanners/etc., use of their personal cellular phones and/or landlines, and were not provided reimbursement for those expenses by the Firm;”
“All female attorneys who work(ed) for Duane Morris during the statutory period until commencement of trial (or such other time as ordered by the Court);” and
“All non-White attorneys who worked for Duane Morris during the statutory period until commencement of trial (or such other time as ordered by the Court).”
Are you owed unclaimed settlement money? Check out our class action rebates page full of open class action settlements.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.