Kathryn Montgomery Moran

Practice Details

• Firm Information
  Position

  Principal and Office Litigation Manager

  Firm Name

  Jackson Lewis P.C.
• Representative Cases & Transactions
  Cases

  Representative Experience: Kathryn has successfully tried numerous cases, including the following jury trials:
  Tried a religious discrimination case on behalf of a Village in federal court in Chicago. Plaintiff applied for the position of Finance Director. Although she was the top c
  idate for the job, the Village did not hire her because she was unable to work on Saturdays due to her religion. Kathryn argued that changing the Village's procedures to eliminate the need for the Finance Director to work on Saturdays would be an undue hardship. The jury agreed
  returned a verdict for the Village.
  Tried a race
  pregnancy discrimination case on behalf of an insurer in federal court in Atlanta. Plaintiff, who worked for the company for three years, claimed that she was terminated three days after she asked her supervisor about maternity benefits. Four witnesses testified that the claims manager was racist
  sexist
  that he did not want employees having young'uns on his payroll. Kathryn succeeded in convincing the jury that the termination had nothing to do with the plaintiff's race or pregnancy, but rather was due to her inappropriate conduct, including her use of foul language to a co-worker. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the company. In two companion cases, employees of the same company filed lawsuits claiming retaliation for complaining about discrimination against the employee who was terminated. Kathryn obtained summary judgment in favor of the company on both of those claims.
  Tried a race discrimination
  tortious interference case to a jury in federal court in Chicago for a national engineering firm. The plaintiff in the case, a managing engineer, was employed by the company for many years
  was promoted twice. He was terminated by the president of the company after the president learned that he had insulted a client during a meeting. The plaintiff's supervisor
  other members of company management opposed the termination
  urged the president to reverse his decision. The plaintiff sued both the company
  its president, claiming that he had not insulted the client, that the company failed to investigate the incident,
  that other employees who engaged in similar conduct-including, allegedly, the president himself-had not been terminated. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the company
  the president on both counts. The plaintiff appealed,
  the appellate court affirmed the jury's decision in favor of the employer.