Sexual / Age Harassment & Discrimination

The firm of Jaroslawicz & Jaros has been representing persons and their families that have suffered sexual or age harassment and discrimination claims for many years and our experienced attorneys have argued these issues before all levels of the State and Federal courts including the United States Supreme Court.

David Jaroslawicz had the privilege to appear and argue before the United States Supreme Court in Washington D.C. In the case of UPS v. Mitchell, No. 80-169 , SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 451 U.S. 56; 101 S. Ct. 1559; 67 L. Ed. 2d 732; 1981 U.S. 86; 49 U.S.L.W. 4378; 91 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P12, 683; February 24, 1981, Argued, April 20, 1981, Decided. In this case Jaroslawicz & Jaros represented the plaintiff who worked at UPS and in which the issue was how a 90-day state statute of limitations was applicable in appealing an arbitrator’s decision in an action that was brought under the Labor Management Relations Act.

In a case where our client alleged age discrimination David Jaroslawicz had the privilege to argue the appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In Frankel v. Bally, Inc., Docket No. 92-7861, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 987 F.2d 86; 61 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 218; 60 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P42, 053, January 4, 1993, Argued, February 17, 1993, Decided. The issue was a question of whether the individual was an employee or independent contractor within meaning of ADEA.

David Jaroslawicz of Jaroslawicz & Jaros was the attorney in the landmark case of D’Amico v. Commodities Exchange, 59708, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department, 235 A.D.2d 313; 652 N.Y.S.2d 294; 1997 N.Y. App. Div. 506; January 23, 1997, Decided , January 23, 1997, Entered. The court for the first time found that the commodities exchange was a place of public accommodation and a female member’s action against the male members of the exchange alleging sexual discrimination and harassment withstood summary judgment. Click here for the details.

David Jaroslawicz of Jaroslawicz & Jaros was the attorney in the landmark case involving a Boy Scout leader who sexually abused two young brothers in the case of Schultz v. Boy Scouts of Am., Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, First Department, 102 A.D.2d 100; 476 N.Y.S.2d 309; May 24, 1984. Where the court found that most of the acts alleged in a complaint against a charitable organization and its employee took place in New Jersey, that state was the only state with an interest in the case, and its charitable immunity statute applied to bar the action. This case was then briefed and argued before the highest courts of the States of New York and New Jersey.

On 1/16/2000 The New York Observer profiled David Jaroslawicz of Jaroslawicz & Jaros in an article about sexual harassment in silicon alley as a result of Jaroslawicz & Jaros successfully bringing three separate lawsuits against internet companies on behalf of their female employees that were making allegations of sexual harassment.

If you or a loved one have a claim involving what you believe was Sexual or age Harassment & Discrimination and are in need of legal assistance, call Jaroslawicz & Jaros at 212-227-2780, or toll free in New York 1-800-269-2780, or submit an online questionnaire. The initial consultation is free of charge, and if we agree to handle your case, we will work on a contingency fee basis, which means we get paid for our services only if there is a monetary recovery of funds. In many cases, a lawsuit must be filed before an applicable expiration date, known as a statute of limitations. Please call to ensure that you do not waive your right to possible compensation.