top of page
  • Paul Peter Nicolai


Updated: Feb 15, 2022

After getting a judgment against its former employee, the employer seized his minivan. Rather than sell it to satisfy the judgment, the employer demanded the employee’s ex-wife convince him to drop his disability discrimination claim at the MCAD. When this failed, the employer returned the minivan. The MCAD ruled this was illegal retaliation and held against the employer. On appeal, the Superior Court upheld this and on a further appeal the appeals court also upheld this as extortion.

Why This Is Important... The employer argued it was just exercising its legal rights because it was awarded a judgment it was enforcing. The MCAD and the courts said what actually happened here showed that the employer was really trying to extort a dismissal of the MCAD charge. Employers should understand that any form of retribution, even indirect forms one which have the color of legal legitimacy associated with them, can form the basis for a retaliation charge at most state and federal anti-discrimination agencies.

Recent Posts

See All

Over the last two decades, over two-thirds of the states have passed laws authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes by persons with debilitating conditions. Over one-third of the states ha

A plaintiff withheld an email saying the attorney-client privilege protected it. The plaintiff’s CEO received the email from the company’s in-house counsel. The CEO forwarded the email to a hotel fron

A court of appeals affirmed the district court’s ruling by concluding that emails were judicial records to which the common law right of access to judicial proceedings was attached. Since the public’s

bottom of page