Boston MA Employment Law, Civil Cases and Government Agencies
Paul L. Nevins
 Legal Experience And Jurisprudence
Although a sole practitioner, Attorney Paul L. Nevins of Boston has been involved in extensive, complex civil cases during his legal career. In most cases, he has prosecuted as a plaintiff's attorney on behalf of employees who have been victims of age, sex, race or disability cases. Early in his career, he represented the prevailing plaintiff in Denton v. Boilermakers Union, Local 29, 650 F. Supp. 1151 ( D. Mass., 1986 ), a race discrimination case in which Judge Wolf found a continuing civil rights violation which permitted the plaintiff to roll back his statute of limitations with respect to damages.
More recently, Mr. Nevins was the lead attorney for the plaintiff in the seminal case of Iwata v. Intel Corp, 349 F. Supp. 2d 135 ( D. Mass., 2004 ) ( Young, J. ). In that case, attorney Nevins was also able to persuade the federal court that the refusal of an insurance company to honor the terms of a long-term disability policy violated the cognate provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA ), 42 U.S.C. § 12101- et seq.; that its provisions were more expansive and trumped any contrary provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ( ERISA ), 29 USC § 1001; and, for that reason, the kind of policy in question violated Ms. Iwata's rights and potentially could discriminate against millions of Americans who became disabled because of emotional traumas or illnesses.
Over the years, Nevins has successfully represented countless employees who have been fired from their jobs for discriminatory reasons. See, for example, Allenson v. Norton Public Schools, et al., C.A. 00-1059 ( Bristol, 2003 ); Jerauld v. Waltham Housing Authority, et al, C.A. 04-807 ( Middlesex, 2007 ); City of Boston School Committee v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discriminationand Edward Burley, C. A. No. 07-1333 ( Suffolk, 2008 ). Attorney Nevins has also negotiated long-term contracts for employees who have negotiating leverage, and he has successfully opposed the efforts of former employers to enforce the terms of non-competition agreements against key executives and other highly-compensated employees in scores of cases.
Paul Nevins has stated, "I am persuaded that age, sex, race and disability discrimination remain as pervasive problems in the workplace. "As an employment attorney, Paul Nevins is also persuaded that the concept of "at-will employment" and the enforcement for non-competition agreements against former employees and without compensation are evidence that the legal system remains heavily weighted against the rights of employees. Based upon his many years of experience, he has also discovered that, because of lax enforcement at the federal and state levels, large numbers of employees are improperly classified as salaried or exempt employees when, in fact, the work they do requires that they be paid hourly wages, including time and a half for workweeks in excess of forty hours.
Government Agencies and Links
Almost all discrimination claims require presentment to state or federal administrative agency before a lawsuit can be filed. In Massachusetts, the Commission Against Discrimination is charged with the enforcement of claims under Massachusetts omnibus civil rights statute, M.G.L. c. 151B-et seq. Employment discrimination claims which must be filed within 300 days of the last wrong. Further, in order to meet the jurisdictional requirement concerning the definition of an employee, the employer complained of must employ at least six or more employees. For further information, go to ma.gov/mcad.
At the federal level, The United States Equal Employment Commission is charged with the enforcement of federal anti-discrimination laws, which include the Americans With Disabilities Act ( ADA ), 42 U.S.C. § 12101- et seq, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ( ADEA ), 29 U.C.S. 621-et seq. and race and sex discrimination claims ( Title VII, 1964 Civil Rights Act ), 42 U.S.C 2000(e)-et seq., among others. The statutes of limitations and jurisdictional requirements with respect to the number of employees are different under federal law. For additional information, go to eeoc.gov.
Violations of wage and hour laws at the state level are within the jurisdiction of the Office of the Attorney General. For further information, go to ma.gov and scroll down to the Attorney General's page. At the federal level, violation of federal labor laws are enforced by the United States Department of Labor. For further information, go to dol.gov.
Call Paul L. Nevins today at 617-372-9890 to schedule your appointment, or browse our website for more information regarding Employment Litigation or Paul Nevins. If you have any other questions or comments, please contact us.
http://www.politicsofselfishness.com/ |
