Godfrey & Kahn hit with age discrimination claim

Listen to this article

Longtime Godfrey & Kahn SC litigator William H. Levit, Jr. has filed an age discrimination claim against the firm.

In the complaint filed September 1 with the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD), Levit alleges than since 2004 the Milwaukee-based firm has continuously treated him unfairly because of his age.

“My responsibilities and compensation have decreased as a result of discrimination against me on the basis of my age,” states Levit in the complaint.

He joined the firm in 1983 and is currently the senior member of Godfrey & Kahn’s Litigation Practice Group, according to his Web site biography.

Levit, 71, declined to comment on the complaint.

Godfrey & Kahn managing partner Richard J. Bliss said the firm has similarly aged partners in similar positions and is “vigorously contesting” the claim.

The firm’s Web site lists 98 shareholders, including Levit. About 10 percent are at least 60 years old, according to Martindale-Hubbell.

“Obviously we think the claim is without any merit,” Bliss said.

Bliss declined to comment on why he thought the claim was brought, and said he was unaware of any other past claims against the firm. (According to DWD, this is the only discrimination complaint in their database filed against Godfrey & Kahn.)

Other current and former employees of the firm also said they were not aware of any past instances of discrimination.

In the complaint, Levit states that the discrimination has been “effected by and through the Managing Partner, the Compensation Committee and the Management Committee” at the firm.

Employer or employee?

Discrimination claims by law firm partners are unusual, but not unheard of.

In 2005, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)filed an age discrimination suit against Chicago law firm Sidley Austin on behalf of 32 attorneys who had their partnership status taken away. (EEOC v. Sidley Austin LLP, No. 05 C 0208 (N.D. Ill.).)

The firm settled the suit in 2007 for $27.5 million.

Prior to the settlement, the 7th Circuit ruled that the EEOC could seek damages against the firm even though none of the partners had filed a complaint with the agency. (437 F.3d 695)

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a petition for certiorari.

Marquette University Law School Professor Paul M. Secunda said the case provided some guidance for firms as to whether partners should be considered employers or employees.

“Traditionally, a partner was considered a part-owner or employer,” Secunda said. “The Sidley Austin case said it’s not as easy as simply putting a label on someone.”

Secunda noted that firms need to determine what role a partner plays within the context of its business model. Some simply practice law, while others are involved in hiring and firing employees or helping set up compensation standards.

“The Sidley case involved older attorneys who were more employees in a sense that they received salaries, and the court agreed,” Secunda said.

According to his firm biography, Levit has chaired Godfrey & Kahn’s Litigation Practice Group, and served on the firm’s Board of Directors and on the Loss Prevention Partner and Claims Counsel.

He is alleging his compensation, assignments and participation with clients have diminished as a result of the firm discriminating against him because of his age.

“If those [allegations] are all true, it rises to the level of an adverse employment situation,” Secunda said.