Author: JGL Law

Brian Markovitz, JGL Principal and Andy Santillo of Winebrake and Santillo represent Estephanie Martiniz, a former warehouse employee at Amazon in Baltimore in claims against Amazon for unpaid wages and unjust enrichment. On November 11, 2024, the Court certified her class action against Amazon on behalf of 23,914 other workers.

In this episode of JGL LAW FOR YOU, JGL family law attorneys Christopher Castellano and David Bulitt discuss AI’s Impact on Your Divorce.

The EEOC stands for the “Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.” This agency investigates potential cases of employment discrimination and harassment—based on protected categories—and retaliation.

In Maryland, in addition to filing a charge with the EEOC, aggrieved individuals can cross-file their charges with Fair Employment Practices Agencies (“FEPAs”). In Maryland, these FEPAs include the Maryland Commission on Civil Rights (“MCCR”) and various county agencies, such as the Prince George’s County Office of Human Rights.

After the EEOC completes its investigation of the charge, if the EEOC cannot determine that there is reasonable cause to believe that discrimination or retaliation took place, the EEOC will issue a “Dismissal and Notice of Rights.” This notice advises the Charging Party that they have 90 days from receiving the notice to file a lawsuit based on the EEOC charge in court.

However, if the EEOC finds reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred, the EEOC will issue a Letter of Determination to both parties, inviting them to seek to resolve the charge via conciliation. If conciliation is unsuccessful in resolving the charge, the EEOC can file a lawsuit on behalf of the Charging Party. Alternatively, if the EEOC decides not to file a lawsuit, the EEOC will send the Charging Party a Notice of Right to Sue, and the Charging Party will have 90 days to file a lawsuit.

For additional information regarding the EEOC, read our post “What is the EEOC, and Do I Need Labor & Employment Representation?”

JGL principal David Bulitt and his wife Julie, a therapist, were interviewed on Fox 5 Washington, DC on November 8. David and Julie discussed five ways couples can divorce-proof their marriage:

1. Engage in a physical touch first thing in the morning
2. Maintain some connection during the workday to let your partner know you are thinking about them
3. When you arrive home from work, pay attention to your partner first; it’s important to prioritize your relationship
4. Carve out a little alone time in the evening to catch up and check in
5. Finish the day like you started it with a physical touch

Watch the interview to get more information about ways to create habits that will divorce-proof your marriage.

Do you know about illegal billing or fraud at (1) your work, (2) by one of your family’s medical providers, or (3) through any other interactions that you have where someone or some company receives government funding?

Then, you might have a False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 – 3733 (“FCA”) case (also known as a qui tam) if the billing involves federal money, a state False Claims Act case if the case involves state funds, or both if there is joint funding like Medicaid. You should certainly investigate whether you should report it to the proper authorities. Fraud and illegal billing are wrong, costs taxpayers a lot of money each year, and if it is happening at your work, you could be on the wrong side of a government investigation. Plus, if you report the fraud, you can receive a finders’ fee or share of whatever the government recovers.

Here are five tips to remember when you know about illegal billing or fraud:

1) Get an Experienced Attorney

You will need an attorney who practices in the False Claims Act (FCA) or whistleblower law. In fact, depending on what you are reporting, you must have an attorney. As the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit explains when filing an FCA case, “we conclude that they [individuals] are not entitled to proceed pro se [a fancy way of saying without an attorney].”[1]

Do your research on who to meet with and possibly hire. Properly filing and prosecuting FCA matters, or other whistleblower programs, is complicated work that is full of pitfalls. As Mark Twain said, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” An attorney who has not worked on an FCA matter before is likely to be unclear about the process and will inevitably fall into the FCA’s pitfalls. Getting an experienced lawyer should alleviate this concern.

2) The Seal and Your Secret Agent Status

All FCA matters are filed under seal until the court unseals them, often at the Government’s request. Do not go to the press or try to negotiate with a defendant prior to or at any time while the case is sealed. Violating the seal can tip off the defendant and greatly undermine the Government’s ability to investigate the case. “The mere possibility that the Government might be harmed by disclosure is, in fact, the point of the [the seal] requirement.”[2] A guaranteed way to demonstrate to law enforcement officials that you cannot be trusted is to violate the seal by talking to anyone. This puts those officials at a disadvantage and in an adverse position to you.

3) File Your Non-FCA Claims with the FCA Complaint

If you have any other claims against the defendant, such as you are an employee who was fired wrongfully, file your personal claims in the underlying FCA matter so they stay under seal. You want to avoid having a concurrent proceeding where the defendant has the opportunity to ask you questions, whether in a deposition or otherwise, that could reveal your FCA case while it is under seal. Simple questions from a defendant’s attorney, such as “list all court filings you have participated in,” can lead to huge complications because you have to answer the question but not reveal that an FCA matter has been filed under seal. In sum, if you have weak, personal claims but strong whistleblower claims, you may want to forget the personal claims altogether.

4) Gather Appropriate Documentation

The Government will want evidence of the fraud and will not just take your word for it. If you have normal access, especially within your normal duties if you are an employee, make copies or take pictures of documents that support that the fraud is occurring. Do not, however, go through and copy a server or documents outside of your normal work duties. Also, you should never give your attorney something that the company attorney wrote as that information could be attorney-client privileged information.

If possible, get documents that show detailed and specific examples of false submissions to the government such as billing statements or patient records. This will make the government interested in your case and stop it from getting dismissed.

5) The Dr. Evil One Million Dollar Rule

In Mike Myers’ 1997 comedy, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery, the villain, Dr. Evil, states that “we hold the world ransom for . . . ONE MILLION DOLLARS!” To which his henchman states, “Don’t you think we should ask for more than a million dollars? A million dollars isn’t exactly a lot of money these days”[3] ― completely true. But one million dollars should generally be the rule of thumb for going forward on whistleblower cases. Practically speaking, these cases take significant time and effort, and while there is no written U.S. Justice Department policy, it has been our experience that the Government is generally not interested in using its limited resources to pursue FCA matters worth less than one million dollars.

Now, you should be well prepared to get a meeting with an attorney to see if you have a case. Good luck.

---

[1] United States ex rel. Mergent Servs. v. Flaherty, 540 F.3d 89, 93 (2nd Cir. 2008).

[2] United States ex rel. Summers v. LHC Group, Inc., 623 F.3d 287, 297-298 (6th Cir. 2010) (emphasis in original)

[3] See Memorable quotes for Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118655/quotes (visited Nov. 5, 2024).

It is illegal for your employer to fire or take any other adverse action against you because you requested FMLA leave or took FMLA leave. It is similarly illegal for an employer to do this to interfere with your FMLA rights, such as firing you because you are about to take FMLA leave.

However, your employer can fire you while you are on FMLA leave (or about to take FMLA leave for reasons that are not because you are exercising your rights under the FMLA). Your FMLA leave may also be protected under other laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), and/or other state and local laws that may provide some broader protections in relation to medical leave.

What Is the FMLA?

The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was created to protect employees while on leave due to medical reasons. The FMLA is a federal, nationwide law that provides employees with twelve weeks of unpaid leave per year. Employers cannot retaliate against an employee for applying or taking medical leave covered by the FMLA, nor can an employer interfere with an employee’s rights to take FMLA leave.

Types of FMLA Leave

FMLA allows employees to take leave for a personal medical issue; take care of an immediate family member; take care of a newborn child, a newly adopted or a new foster child; take care of pregnancy complications; and for other serious medical necessities. FMLA can be used for issues related to pregnancy and/or disability; however, it can also be used for other medical matters such as routine illness from the flu, or medical appointments such as an annual physical or urgent care visit. FMLA leave can be a stretch of consecutive time, or it can be used for part days. Your FMLA leave can be a fixed schedule request, such as going to a medical appointment every Wednesday morning. It can also be for intermittent leave, such as for a condition that may cause you to be out of work and/or seek medical care when you are experiencing symptoms.

FMLA Coverage Requirements

Requirements for FMLA coverage are:

• The employee must have worked for a total of 12 months for the employer.
• A minimum of 1,250 hours must be worked by the employee during the 12 months immediately preceding the leave.
• FMLA only applies to companies with 50 or more employees within 75 miles.

The FMLA is a federal law that sets minimum requirements across the country. In addition to the FMLA, policies regarding unpaid medical leave may vary from state to state. Some states offer greater options and benefits. Special rules apply to education agencies such as schools that may give more flexibility than other employers. Additionally, there are different requirements for military caregiver FMLA. State and/or local laws can add to the protections of the FMLA but cannot reduce them.

If you qualify for FMLA medical leave, it provides job-protected leave benefits. This means when you take FMLA leave your job (or an equivalent) must be available to you upon your return.

Can Your Employer Fire You When You Are on FMLA?

An employee cannot be fired for retaliatory reasons for taking or requesting FMLA medical leave or for the purposes of interfering with an employee’s FMLA leave. Retaliation could include termination, as well as other actions such as a demotion, denial of a promotion, reduced pay and/or bonus, unfavorable reassignment and more. It’s important to meet with an experienced labor and employment attorney if you feel you have been wrongfully terminated due to FMLA.

There is the possibility of being terminated while on or returning from FMLA. An employer with any legitimate, non-discriminatory, and non-retaliatory reason can terminate an employee regardless of their FMLA leave status. However, employers cannot do so because of the employee’s FMLA. Examples of legitimate reasons for terminating an employee on FMLA leave are primarily:

• Poor performance or misconduct from the employee before taking FMLA.
• Evidence that the employee would have been terminated even if FMLA leave had not been taken. For example, a reduction in the workforce that had been documented before taking leave.

Remember that just because an employer states a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason does not mean that this is the real reason for the actions. These stated legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons may be pretext for employment discrimination. For example, the employer may say that the employee had poor performance, but the allegations made about poor performance are not in fact true. Or, even if the stated allegations of the poor performance are true, they can still be pretext for discrimination. For example, if the employer’s legitimate, non-discriminatory reason is that the employee came into work late, this could in theory be a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason to fire someone, but could be pretext for discrimination if the employer doesn’t fire other people who come in 10 minutes late, or the employer’s policies are to take other, less harsh steps against employees who are 10 minutes late.

If you believe the reasons stated for terminating you or otherwise mistreating you while on FMLA are pretext for discrimination, you should contact an experienced labor and employment attorney.

Intersection Between the FMLA and Other Laws

There is an overlap between the FMLA and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), and other state and local laws regarding disability discrimination and/or pregnancy discrimination. Your requests for leave and/or schedule accommodations may be protected under these laws as well. In addition, these laws prohibit discrimination because of your pregnancy and/or disability, and require employers to provide reasonable accommodations, which can include leave and/or modified schedules. These laws also prohibit retaliation for requesting accommodations, including leave and/or modified schedules.

Just because your request was framed as an FMLA request does not mean that the underlying reason for the request wasn’t due to pregnancy and/or disability. In fact, the FMLA request can provide employers notice of the same.

In addition, these laws protect you in the hiring process and from day one on the job, unlike the FMLA, which begins after one year. The ADA, PDA, and PWFA, cover employers with 15 or more employees in any location, unlike the FMLA which only covers employers with 50 or more employees within 75 miles. Your state and or local laws may cover even smaller employers, as they do in both DC and Maryland.

The ADA also prohibits discrimination against employees due to their association with someone with a disability, such as having a family member with a disability. This means that if your employer is mistreating you because of your association with someone with a disability, this can violate the ADA. One common example is an employer that stereotypes an employee as unreliable or less hard working due to their need to care for a family member with a disability, or even a perception that they will be a worse employee because of their obligations towards this individual with a disability. An employee in this situation may have a claim under the FMLA for taking and/or requesting leave, as well as a claim under the ADA.

The ADA does not require employers to provide reasonable accommodations related to the disability of anyone other the employee, so requesting leave to care for a sick family member would not be an accommodation under the ADA but would be covered by the FMLA.

What To Do

If you think your FMLA rights have been violated, the best way to handle the situation is to consult with a labor and employment attorney. Call or e-mail us at Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, P.A. to schedule a consultation with an experienced attorney regarding your labor and employment issue or wrongful termination claim. We offer reliable counsel on how best to proceed and what your rights and responsibilities are.

The False Claims Act – What Cybersecurity Contractors Need to Know and Do

In an article published on October 30, 2024, by Cybersecurity Law Report, Veronica Nannis states that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has its sights set on cybersecurity fraud and is pursuing alleged offenders under the False Claims Act (FCA).

The article provides an FCA primer, including the four elements of a violation, the associated penalties, and whistleblowers and their incentives.

Nannis also details the DOJ’s Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative, which was announced in 2021, and reviews recent cybersecurity fraud settlements and two closely watched litigation matters. The article concludes with tips that cybersecurity contractors can use to mitigate risk and avoid investigations.

Read the article “What to Know (and Do) About DOJ’s Efforts to Identify and Prosecute Cybersecurity Fraud Under the False Claims Act” (PDF) from the Cybersecurity Law Report.

In this episode of JGL LAW FOR YOU, JGL attorneys Lindsay Parvis and David Bulitt discuss Qualified Domestic Relations Orders, where pensions and retirement funds are divided as part of a divorce.

In an article published in University Business on October 24, 2024, Veronica Nannis notes that fraud investigations are on the rise in higher education institutions.

She details a number of fraud cases against universities that were brought under the False Claims Act, a unique fraud-fighting statute that lets ordinary citizens step into the shoes of the government to recover fraudulent gains. These whistleblowers are called “relators” and use insider information to file fraud cases on the government’s behalf. Many of the cases Veronica highlights settled for millions of dollars, and the relators received a portion of the settlement.

Experienced in bringing and litigating False Claims Act cases, Veronica provides insight that higher education institutions can use to avoid similar fates, including developing real, transparent and robust compliance programs; requiring mandatory, yearly training on the polices and the real cost of violations; and establishing effective protections and anti-retaliation measures for whistleblowers, who almost always try to address suspected fraud internally before reporting to the government.

Read the full article to learn more (PDF).

In this episode of JGL LAW FOR YOU, JGL attorneys Chris Castellano and David Bulitt discuss the impact of social media on family law litigation.

JGL Senior Counsel, The Baltimore Sun recently asked Michal Shinnar to comment on recent developments in the Internal Affairs Division:

The Maryland State Police is moving the unit’s sworn investigators to barracks across the state and bringing in new commanders, the agency confirmed Monday. Police spokeswoman Elena Russo said in a Monday statement that the moves are a part of “plans to rebuild and strengthen our IAD to provide quality and timely services to our personnel and to the communities we serve.” She cast the move as part of a broader effort by the superintendent to improve the statewide law enforcement agency alongside his “commitment to ensuring excellence.”

While sworn investigators are being rotated back out to the Field Operations Bureau, the Internal Affairs Division’s civilian personnel will “remain consistent,” Russo’s statement said. The steps by the superintendent, Colonel Roland L. Butler Jr., follow recent news of a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice to remedy what the proposed consent decree calls “unintentional discrimination against African American and female applicants” through the state police testing process. It also comes amid ongoing litigation alleging racial discrimination against troopers of color, which a federal judge allowed to move forward last month.

The department did not directly answer questions about what spurred the moves but said Monday it was unrelated to the DOJ consent decree and the lawsuit. An agency-wide personnel order sent Friday listed the following transfers out of the Internal Affairs Division: two corporals, one detective sergeant, six sergeants, one lieutenant and one captain. The only sworn members being transferred into Internal Affairs on that personnel order were a captain and a lieutenant. The moves go into effect Wednesday, according to the order. The agency said Monday evening that administrative investigations would be conducted by state police personnel, and that “serious cases” would be “temporarily assigned to our seasoned investigators.”

Russo said administrative investigations will continue to be overseen by the Internal Affairs Division command staff. A website for the Internal Affairs Division lists nine full-time investigators who “are geographically assigned to local barracks statewide.” If that holds true, it’s possible those nine were the two corporals and seven detective sergeants transferred out. The website does not list civilian roles in the division. In a Friday email to the agency’s staff, Butler addressed the changes with similar wording to Russo’s statement. He said the agency was “currently implementing plans to rebuild and strengthen our IAD to provide quality and timely services to all,” calling it “another step taken in our commitment to ensuring excellence.

“Best practices, along with the feedback we receive, will remain instrumental in improving our processes moving forward,” Butler wrote. “Thank you for your trust and patience as we preserve our legacy as ‘Maryland’s Finest.’ “A state government website shows Internal Affairs falling under Butler’s purview, in the Office of Secretary, or the Office of the Superintendent, as itis referred to in budget documents. That part of the budget, which also include diversity initiatives, legal counsel, the media team and others, made up roughly 7.6% of the agency’s overall $615.3 million budget in the current fiscal year, according to a state analysis of the agency’s budget. The department’s recently announced proposal to resolve the Justice Department investigation includes $2.75 million being set aside for prospective troopers who were discriminated against, as well as improvements to physical and written hiring tests.

The consent decree, which lays out those terms, is subject to approval in federal court. According to that document, filed in U.S. District Court, 19 Black applicants and 29 female applicants would have been hired if not for the discrimination tests. At the time the Justice Department announced the investigation, the U.S. Attorney for Maryland, Erek L. Barron, told The Baltimore Sun that the probe would examine how the agency hires, promotes, trains, disciplines, and makes special opportunities available to employees.

Micha Shinnar, an attorney representing troopers of color in the lawsuit seeking class-action status, noted that their complaint alleges “the numerous and serious ways that Internal Affairs was engaged in discrimination against officers of color at Maryland State Police.” Her clients, three current and former troopers, alleged a longstanding pattern of discrimination through discipline, retaliation, and the denial of promotions. They are seeking policy changes, a monitor to oversee the agency and individual relief.

Among other things, the complaint argued troopers of color were disciplined for minor or nonexistent policy violations, with punishments that exceeded recommendations and investigations that took long periods of time. One plaintiff in the complaint, for example, was suspended for 301 days during an investigation into an alleged one-hour error in his timecard, according to the complaint. “We hope Maryland State Police will take all steps to ensure this discrimination stops,” Shinnar said.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a household phrase and is only growing in ubiquity. The tools implementing “AI” are increasingly being used to assist with various tasks, such as writing music, creating images, and even answering legal questions.

There is no question that AI has and will continue to usher in a new age of convenience and the sense that one can tackle any issue they are faced with. However, the sense of confidence provided by AI carries with it significant risk and for individuals seeking to represent themselves whilst using AI tools, doing so can be to their detriment. Let’s explore the potential dangers of AI in the context of handling your divorce case.

1. AI Lacks Personal Knowledge of Your Unique Situation

No two divorces are the same. While technology is advancing, AI lacks the ability to understand subtle facts and laws in order to employ unique strategy decisions. Meaning, a computer can’t think like a human. This is because the result of any AI prompt is derivative of prior circumstances known to the AI database. Therefore, using AI tools may prevent you from developing a strategy specific to your set of facts. For example:

• Child Custody Issues: Determining the best interests of the child in a custody dispute is not a simple task. Maryland courts consider a variety of legal factors. Assuming AI tools are able to accurately determine the legal factors, applying your unique facts to those legal factors weighed in the context of your case and your opposing party’s position is a task that AI is unable to perform at a level necessary for your case.
• Property Division: Maryland is an “equitable distribution” state, meaning property acquired during the marriage is divided fairly, but not necessarily equally. Like with custody cases, Maryland courts consider several legal factors and again, AI may not accurately balance the equities of parties in order to deal with assets like retirement accounts, family businesses, or real estate holdings.

2. AI Cannot Navigate Court Procedures and Legal Nuances

The divorce process in Maryland involves an understanding of specific legal procedures, statutes, rules, and decades of case law. While AI can help you generate forms or define legal concepts, it is oftentimes a flawed process that leads to obvious inaccuracies.

• Filing and Documentation: Mistakes in filing forms or drafting motions can lead to significant adverse outcomes, including the risk of a court ordering that you pay attorneys fees due to your submission of documents to the court that contain inaccuracies.
• Courtroom Representation: If your divorce proceeds to court, AI cannot represent you. While the concept may make for an interesting movie premise, the reality is that you are “on your own” in front of the Court and AI as a crutch is unavailable to you.

3. AI is Likely to be “Out of Date” on Maryland-Specific Family Law Concepts

While AI can pull from vast amounts of legal data, it is likely to be out of date when it comes to recent changes or updates in Maryland family law. Laws and court rulings change over time, and even a small change in legislation or case law can impact the outcome of your divorce.

For example, Maryland has recently seen a change to the grounds for divorce and AI systems are unlikely to be updated to incorporate these changes, which will have a significant impact on any prompt you submit.

4. AI is Incapable of Drafting a Long-Term Successful Agreement

Divorce settlements can have long-lasting effects on your finances, property, and parenting arrangements. Mistakes made during the negotiation and drafting process due to a reliance on AI can be difficult and expensive to correct after the fact. For instance:

• Child Support and Alimony: Calculating child support or alimony involves multiple factors, and AI may not consider all the nuances required by Maryland law. A miscalculation in these areas could leave you financially vulnerable or locked into an unfair agreement.
• Enforceability of Agreements: If you use AI to draft a separation agreement, they may not meet the legal standards required by Maryland courts, a concern that may only be apparent months or years after the fact and lead to significant and costly litigation in the future.

Conclusion: The Value of Legal Expertise in Maryland Divorce Cases

While AI can be a helpful supplement in some areas of life, it is not a substitute for professional legal advice, particularly in the arena of your domestic legal case. Maryland’s family law system is complex, and the stakes are too high to rely solely on AI-generated information or documents. A skilled family law attorney can provide personalized advice, an understanding of the legal system, and the ability to advocate for your rights in a way that AI simply cannot. If you’re considering representing yourself in a Maryland divorce with the help of AI, caution is warranted. The potential pitfalls are numerous, and the long-term consequences can be severe. By working with an experienced family law attorney, you can ensure that your rights are protected, your case is handled properly, and you can move forward with your life on solid legal footing.

If you have questions about your divorce or need assistance with your case, feel free to contact our office. We’re here to help you through this challenging time with the expertise and care you deserve.