Friday, August 24, 2012

Lawsuit Filed Against Medical Billing Services Company and its owner for Pregnancy Discrimination


We filed lawsuit against a  Medical Billing company on behalf of a client who was fired from her position as a medical billing assistant after she informed the owner of the company that she was pregnant.

Our client alleges that one month after she was hired as a medical billing assistant, she discovered that she was pregnant. She then advised the owner of the company of her pregnancy.

Our client alleges that the owner repeatedly asked her if she was "going to keep the baby.” That is, if she was going to have an abortion. When our client responded that she was going to keep the baby, the owner allegedly said several times "are you positive?

 One month later, our client did not go to work as she was feeling ill due to her pregnancy. The very next day, she went to work, but had to seek medical attention for work-related injuries caused by dizziness related to her pregnancy. After our client returned to work after seeking medical attention, the company fired her.

Under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD), it is unlawful for an employer to take any adverse action against an employee due to her pregnancy. Firing or disciplining an employee because of her pregnancy constitutes illegal discrimination.

This case was settled prior to trial.
(201) 222- 0123

CONSUMER FRAUD CASE AGAINST NEW JERSEY AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP FOR REFUSING TO TAKE BACK VEHICLE AFTER CREDIT APPLICATION WAS DECLINED

Plaintiff filed a consumer fraud case against a major New Jersey Automobile dealership for refusing to take back a vehicle after the lease financing fell through. The dealership gave the plaintiff possession of the vehicle without having the lease approved The plaintiff took possession of the vehicle subject to the following written condition: “I understand, that my purchase/lease from dealer is not yet final and is subject to credit approval by a financing institution selected by dealer as well as my compliance with all conditions set forth by said financing institution.”

When plaintiff’s application for credit was declined, the plaintiff returned the vehicle. However, the dealership refused to accept the vehicle and attempted to steer the plaintiff into lease terms with higher interest rates. The plaintiff refused.

The dealership refused to return the vehicle until plaintiff filed a complaint with the New Jersey Department of Consumer Affairs. The dealership then released the vehicle and unlawfully holding it for 50 days.

The plaintiff then filed a suit against the dealership for violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The matter was resolved after the dealership agreed to compensate the plaintiff for the wrongful retention of plaintiff’s vehicle for 50 days and reimbursement of attorneys’ fees.

The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (NJCFA) prevents any business from using or employing any improper, unethical, or unconscionable conduct is dealing with its customers. Violation of the NJCFA may subject the business to treble damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.