Skip to main content

Attorney Belfort Presents at the 24th MCLE Annual Employment Law Conference

By December 15, 2021No Comments

Bennett & Belfort congratulates its partner David E. Belfort along with Lynn A. Kappelman (Seyfarth Shaw LLP) for their joint presentation of the annual “Discrimination Law Update” at the 24th MCLE Annual Employment Law Conference 2021.  Mr. Belfort focused his remarks on an assessment of 2021 Massachusetts state court employment decisions, including the following cases:

  1. Meehan v. Med. Info. Tech., Inc., 163 N.E. 3d 436 (Mass. App. Ct. 2021) (Re: The issue was whether the Personnel Records Law MGL c. 149 s. 52C protects an employee that was alleged to have been fired for filing a rebuttal to a Performance Improvement Plan a/k/a PIP.)
  2. Osborne-Trussell v. Children’s Hospital Corporation, 488 Mass. 248 (2021) (Re: The issue was whether the Domestic Violence and Abuse Leave Act (DVLA) M.G.L. c. 149 s. 52E protects an employee that alleges her offer of employment was rescinded because the Defendant was on notice of a Harassment Prevention Order.)
  3. 15 LaGrange St. Corp. v. MCAD, 99 Mass. App. Ct. 563 (2021) (RE: The issue was whether the employer was sufficiently on notice at an MCAD public hearing of a claim for termination based on race discrimination.)
  4. Carnakie-Brown v. Santander Bank 99 Mass. Appeals. Ct. 1120 (RE: The issue was whether there was sufficient evidence of race discrimination and retaliation to survive summary judgment.)
  5. Gavin v. City of Boston (Federal District Court – Docket 1:18 CV 10919-LTS) (RE: The case involved a gender discrimination and retaliation claim.  Summary Judgment explored Cats Paw theory and Federal jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs for $2,000,000.)

Attorney Kappelman focused her remarks on Federal cases, including a case she assisted in handling at the First Circuit involving employees that were terminated  because they did not comply with a Covid 19 vaccine mandate policy at Mass General Brigham (Together Employees, et. al. v. Mass General Brigham Inc. (1st Cir No. 21-1909, see Doc. 117812404 dated 11/18/21).

The conference was conducted remotely again this year with a “Live” audience of over 130.  The conference is available for re-broadcast as a recorded webcast at: