Check out this archive article about Attorney Paul Maxon's success in winning a complex political asylum case for his pro bono client while he practiced with the Los Angeles firm O'Melveny & Myers:

Link to Archived Asylum Article

In May 2004, window manufacturer Milgard Manufacturing settled a lawsuit initiated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) which alleged that Milgard engaged in racially discriminatory hiring practices at its Colorado facility. Leigh Ann Ornelas, a human resources assistant and plaintiff in the suit who was represented by a private attorney, also claimed that she was retaliated against when she complained about the unlawful practices. Statistical analysis of job applications submitted to Milgard's Colorado facility showed that the company hired fewer black applicants than would be demographically predicted. While Milgard denied engaging in wrongful conduct, the company agreed to pay $3.1 million to resolve the lawsuit, which was distributed to African Americans who were denied jobs that they applied for at Milgard. In addition, the company agreed to revamp its policies to comply with federal anti-discrimination laws, to provide more training for Colorado employees regarding workplace discrimination, and to actively recruit to increase the proportion of African American applicants. Joseph H. Mitchell, Regional Attorney for the EEOC's Denver District Office, said, "We are pleased to resolve this case and commend Milgard for acknowledging the importance of preventing discriminatory hiring practices and the importance of not retaliating against employees like Leigh Ann Ornelas, who risked her job to champion the rights of the black applicants who were being denied jobs."

A case recently filed by the Law Office of Paul Maxon dramatically illustrates the liability employers face for negligent hiring decisions. The following story appeared on the front page of the Boulder Daily Camera on March 2, 2007:

Frasier Meadows Sued for Hiring Sex Offender
A civil lawsuit filed in Boulder district court Thursday alleges that the Frasier Meadows Retirement Community was negligent in failing to do proper background checks before hiring a convicted sex offender.

David Francis Frush, 58, worked as a contract maintenance man at Boulder's Frasier Meadows until late March 2006.

The suit was brought by attorneys representing the son of a 74-year-old woman suffering from Alzheimer's disease. It alleges that she "complained to two different Frasier Meadows staff members that she was being molested" between 2004 and March 2006.

The lawsuit alleges that Frush — who has since been jailed for a similar offense in Fort Collins — forced the woman, now living in Niwot, to have sexual relations with him. The suit names Frush, Frasier Meadows and Denver-based Tolin Corp., which contracted Frush's services.

He was convicted in Florida of sexual assault against a child in 1985 and for indecent exposure in 1993, according to a Boulder police report.

"We feel that it's outrageous that an elder-care facility employed or had working for them a convicted multiple sex offender," said Boulder attorney Paul Maxon, the lead attorney in the lawsuit.

Frasier Meadows officials said Thursday they have "no evidence that the physical and sexual assaults described in the complaint occurred." The staff observed that the maintenance worker had a "friendship" with the resident in 2004, officials said, and the resident "denied any improper relationship."

Frush was barred from the retirement-community campus after he was "observed contacting the resident in violation of his work rules," and a subsequent investigation revealed his criminal history, according to a Frasier Meadows statement. He began working there in 2001, and the organization began requiring criminal-background checks for new hires in 2002.

In a police report filed last year, an officer described a phone message Frush left on the woman's answering machine in mid-March 2006 asking, "Is it OK if I come up now?"

"Sometimes we would sit together, lie down together, take our clothes off," the woman said of the encounters in the police report. She despised Frush, she added.

The Fort Collins Coloradoan reported that Frush was accused of sexually assaulting a 78-year-old woman in her apartment at Argyle at Willow Springs in September.

Frush pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact with an at-risk adult on Oct. 24 and was sentenced to 90 days at the Larimer County Jail and 10 years of intensive sex-offender probation on Dec. 19, said Linda Jensen, spokeswoman for the District Attorney's Office in Fort Collins. Credited with 20 days for time already served, Frush is no longer in the jail, an official at the jail said Thursday.

Frush's last reported address was in Fort Collins, according to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation's Convicted Sex Offender Web site. But he was expected to return to Boulder County during his probation.

***
In addition, the following related story appeared in the Rocky Mountain News:

Link to Rocky Mountain News Article

In May 2005, a federal jury awarded $8 million to Dale Alton in a lawsuit brought by The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC alleged that EchoStar Communications Corp., of Englewood, Colorado violated the Americans with Disabilities Act when it refused to provide reasonable accommodation for Mr. Alton, a qualified employee who happens to be blind. It was determined that EchoStar had failed to accommodate Mr. Alton not only in the application process, but also subsequently when they refused to install adaptive software and denied him employment because of his disability. Mr. Alton was turned down for the customer service position that he applied for, even though he was trained to use adaptive software that would allow him to convert speech to text and to "type" faster than most people can read. Other large Denver employers had already successfully used the software and employed blind customer service representatives at their call centers. "This verdict should remind employers that refusing to abide by the law in accommodating individuals with disabilities can be costly," said Joseph Mitchell, Regional Attorney of the EEOC's Denver District Office. "Many individuals with disabilities, such as Dale Alton, are ready, eager and able to work. All they need is the opportunity to do the job without discriminatory barriers based on myths, fears and stereotypes. Employers must remember that disability does not mean inability."

This month, a San Francisco court approved class action status for the Dukes v. Wal-Mart lawsuit, which alleges that the retailer illegally discriminated against female employees when it came to pay and managerial promotions. The class action suit now includes more than 1.5 million women who worked at any of Wal-Mart’s retail stores since December 26, 1998 who, according to the suit, have been or may be subjected to Wal-Mart’s discriminatory pay and promotion policies and practices. To approve the class action, the court found that there was significant evidence of corporate-wide practices of excessive subjectivity and sexual stereotyping in personnel decision-making, as well as statistical evidence of gender disparity. While two-thirds of all Wal-Mart employees are women, only one-third of all managers and 14% of store managers are female. Wal-Mart is the world’s largest retailer, the nation’s most prolific employer, and now faces the country’s biggest employment lawsuit. The company could potentially owe billions in back-pay to make up for discriminatory employment practices against its female employees, as well as punitive damages and other compensation. The affirmation of Wal-Mart’s class action status sends a loud and clear message to employers in Colorado and beyond that engaging in employment practices that discriminate against women is intolerable.

This week, a federal judge in Illinois gave final approval to a $5 million settlement to resolve two class action employment discrimination lawsuits against Colorado-based Woodward Governor. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced the settlement between the global engine parts company and employees who claimed that Woodward engaged in illegal discrimination against African-American, Hispanic, Asian and female employees with respect to pay, promotions and training. These allegations represent violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, as well as the Equal Pay Act (EPA). In addition to the monetary settlement, the court mandated that Woodward utilize an industrial organizational psychologist to perform an analysis of production jobs that were at issue in the suit and develop written job descriptions for those jobs as well as a performance appraisal and compensation review process. Upon completion of the job analysis, Woodward is required to review the job assignments of its current production employees and adjust them as necessary based on the new job descriptions. Woodward must also implement a procedure for investigating complaints of discrimination, provide training to employees regarding its anti-discrimination policy and complaint procedure, report back quarterly regarding promotion decisions, compensation changes, and job training offered to employees. The mandated changes should go a long way toward assuring a workplace free of discrimination at Woodward Governor's 25 facilities worldwide, as well as sending a message to other employers that it doesn't pay to discriminate.

In August 2004, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) settled a class-wide discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against Home Depot on behalf of employees in the company's Colorado stores. The company paid $5.5 million to current and former employees who alleged that in Home Depot's Colorado stores, there was a hostile work environment based on gender, race and national origin. They also claimed that the company retaliated against employees who complained against discrimination. In addition to the monetary settlement, Home Depot agreed to provide training on anti-discrimination laws and to engage in ongoing monitoring in cooperation with the EEOC. "We commend Home Depot for working cooperatively with us to resolve this case," said Joseph H. Mitchell, Regional Attorney in the EEOC's Denver District Office. "Without the willingness of Home Depot to mediate and bring prompt closure, this case could have taken years to litigate. Instead, the parties were able to work collaboratively to bring this matter to an amicable resolution that satisfied the interests of all the parties concerned." Home Depot denies the EEOC's allegations, but settled the suit the very same day that it was filed.