Prior to joining Jackson Lewis, Mr. Mullin represented clients in Director & Officer and Professional Liability litigation, wrongful termination actions and a wide variety of commercial disputes. Since joining the firm in 1994, he has concentrated on employment litigation, unfair competition, trade secret litigation and unlawful conversion of intellectual property. Mr. Mullin has presented lectures and continuing education programs in Trial Practice, State and Federal Evidence, Unfair Competition and Trade Secret Litigation, and has qualified and served as an expert witness in professional liability actions involving the standard of care for both litigation and trial practice.
Representative Jury Trials To Verdict - Jackson Lewis
•Belardi v. Textron, United States District Court, Connecticut, November, 1995. Trial of eighteen consolidated age discrimination cases arising from mass layoffs in the Textron turbine manufacturing facility in Stamford. The claims were based upon sex, race and age discrimination and upon an adverse impact theory based upon flaws in the selection process used to terminate employees in the various departments. Plaintiffs' total demand prior to trial was $18,000,000. Subsequent to a full trial on all issues, the jury was unable to reach a verdict (split 6-3 for defense). During a mediation which followed the trial, all eighteen cases settled on terms which were consistent with the initial offer of the defendant prior to trial, which was approximately ten percent (10%) of the demand.
•Boswell vs. Warehouse Demo Services, Inc., Sacramento Superior Court, November, 2013. Defense of employer in age discrimination, age harassment, and wrongful termination claims brought by warehouse Manager. Defense verdict.
•Burkhalter v. Esprit, San Francisco County Superior Court, October 1997. Breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing brought by an Executive Vice President of Esprit USA who was terminated for poor performance. Plaintiff's case was based upon a written contract which he claimed was modified by a subsequent oral agreement, after which he alleged that he was terminated for pretextual reasons having nothing to do with his performance. Plaintiff's annual compensation package at the time of termination was $500,000; he claimed economic loss based upon his subsequent unemployment, and having to accept a reduced salary at his present job, in a sum exceeding $750,000. Defense verdict.
•Campbell v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, United States District Court, Northern District of California, February, 2009. Discrimination in employment based upon race, and harassment and retaliation claims brought by a former Yard Conductor, who claimed to be discriminated against and fired because he is African American. Demand prior to trial was $1,280,000. Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $230,000.
•Carroll, et al. v. Interstate Brands Corporation, San Francisco Superior Court, May, 2001. This jury trial involved twenty-one plaintiffs in a consolidated race discrimination case, in which the demand exceeded $100,000,000. Following a two month jury trial, non-suit was granted as to two plaintiffs. Plaintiff verdict as to sixteen of the remaining plaintiffs, and mistrial as to three plaintiffs who did not receive a verdict. Plaintiffs claimed that they were discriminated against in failing to be promoted, in being exposed to racial slurs by managers, and by other adverse actions ranging from demotion to termination. The case was settled on appeal for a confidential sum of money which was less than fifteen percent of the demand originally made by plaintiffs before the trial of the action.
•Coates v. Braden Partners, L.P., Fresno County Superior Court, May, 2003. Gender discrimination and retaliation action brought by a former driver who claimed to have been constructively terminated. Coates, who was the only female driver at the Fresno Center, claimed that her failure to be promoted to Center Manager was based upon her sex, and that when she complained to senior management at the Home Office, she was subjected to harassment and retaliation which ultimately forced her to resign. Prior CCP Section 998 Statutory Offer to Compromise of $100,100.00 two years prior to trial. Defense verdict on gender discrimination claim. Verdict of $65,000.00 on retaliation claim only. The case proceeded to verdict on Phase II, in which the jury, who had found malice, presented the plaintiff with a punitive damage award of $00.00. Judgment satisfied following deduction for defendant's costs of suit, resulting in payment of $6,800.
•Coghlan v. Levinson, et al., Los Angeles County Superior Court, August 1998. Gender discrimination, breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and fraud in the inducement brought by the former associate of defendant law firm who was terminated because of a downturn in business. Plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $430,000. Defense verdict on gender discrimination, breach of contract and breach of covenant claims as to all defendants. The jury rendered a verdict against only one of the three partners of the law firm on the claim of fraudulent inducement to accept employment, and awarded plaintiff the sum of $48,000.
•Doe v. Maryknoll Society, et al., Santa Clara Superior Court, March, 1994. Special relationship/agency action against religious society based upon the action of clergy in the operation of a motor vehicle which rendered the plaintiff a brain-damaged quadriplegic. In the first trial, the jury rendered a verdict against the member of the religious society for $3,800,000, and a defense verdict as to the society. Following appeal, the case was remanded for trial against the religious society with instructions on alternative theories of liability. Prior to the second trial plaintiff's demand was $3,800,000, representing the verdict in the first trial exclusive of interest. Following a six week trial, the jury rendered a defense verdict.
•Fowler v. Glidden, Santa Clara Superior Court, April 1999. Wrongful termination, breach of contract and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing by the former manager of a retail outlet of the defendant employer who had allegedly protested the firing of a female co-worker who had claimed constructive termination due to sex harassment of other co-workers. Plaintiff claimed monetary damages in excess of $150,000 and sought emotional distress damages based upon the loss of his job, his house and all assets during his prolonged period of unemployment. Defense verdict.
•Guida v. The Compass Group, Ventura County Superior Court, April 1998. Gender discrimination, breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing brought by the former manager of the employer based upon claims that she was not promoted and was subsequently forced to resign by her superiors. Following presentation of plaintiff's case, the court granted non-suit on all discrimination claims. Rulings on additional pretrial motions resulted in the exclusion of expert testimony by plaintiff's psychiatrist and limited the testimony of key witnesses for the plaintiff. After the court's rulings, the parties settled the remaining contract claim for less than thirty percent of the economic damage claimed.
•Howard v. National Passenger Railroad Corporation, United States District Court, Northern California, May, 2007. Race discrimination, harassment and retaliation claims brought by a Department Manager within the Northern California District, who claimed to have been discriminated against because he is African American, to have been retaliated against (demotion from his management position) because he testified in a race discrimination trial involving another African American co-worker. Defendant claimed that he was demoted because of performance issues and interference with the work of employees of a subcontractor. Defense verdict.
•Kaddis v. J.C. Penney, San Diego Superior Court, July 1997. Gender discrimination against the manager and employer in which plaintiff claimed general damages in excess of $300,000 based on both harassment and discrimination. Plaintiff, who was male, contended that his female manager both harassed and discriminated against him in the workplace, thus causing him severe emotional distress. Plaintiff verdict of $1,400. The judgment was satisfied following a significant reduction in costs and attorneys' fees claimed under statute.
•LandAmerica Financial Group v. Mercury Companies, Los Angeles Superior Court, September 2006. Representation of a parent and two subsidiary title companies as plaintiffs in an unfair competition case based upon claims of breach of fiduciary duty, interference with contract and economic advantage, and misappropriation of trade secrets and confidential information. Statewide injunctive relief was granted in the first phase of litigation, preventing defendants from recruiting employees from the plaintiff companies or soliciting customers from LandAmerica's two California title subsidiaries. The case proceeded to a four month jury trial in the Complex Litigation Division. A verdict in excess of $8,500,000 was obtained for the plaintiff companies, followed by a mediated settlement in which the full amount of the verdict was paid, together with all costs, and the defendants agreed to a stipulated three-state injunction against further raiding for a period of three years.
•Munson vs. Splice Communications, United States District Court, Northern District of California, March, 2014. Representation of defendant internet company against a claim of wrongful termination by former Senior Vice President. Defense verdict.
•North American Title Company v. Liberty Title Company, et al., Contra Costa Superior Court, May, 2008. Representation of defendant title company and senior executives in an unfair competition case based upon claims of breach of fiduciary duty, interference with contract and economic advantage, and misappropriation of trade secrets and confidential information. Defendant executives left North American to found a new, competing title company in Northern California. Plaintiff claimed breach of contract and fiduciary duty by several key executives in recruiting former coworkers to join Liberty Title, and that trade secrets and other proprietary information was used to facilitate that effort. It sought $38,000,000 in damages. Verdict for plaintiff of $2,800,000, representing less than ten percent of damages demanded at trial. Case settled for $1,000,000 following post-trial motions.
•MacIntyre v. Macy's West, Los Angeles Superior Court, March, 2001. Wrongful imprisonment of employee which led to a stress disability leave and subsequent claim for constructive termination and defamation. Demand prior to trial of $600,000. Defendant made a statutory offer to compromise of $20,000 prior to trial. Jury verdict $20,000.00, subject to $34,000.00 offset for workers' compensation payments made to plaintiff resulting in a zero dollar verdict.
•McMillon v. The Good Guys, Los Angeles County Superior Court, August 1997. Sex harassment against the employer arising from acts of co-workers who made sexual gestures. Plaintiff claimed that management failed to prevent harassment of plaintiff in this retail environment. Non-suit granted at the conclusion of trial.
•Morgan vs. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, United States District Court for the Northern District of California, June 2004. Race harassment case tried to a jury on remand from the United States Supreme Court. Plaintiff presented evidence of racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation against African Americans over a period from 1988 through 1996, both at the Oakland Maintenance Facility where he worked and at two other locations. Demand prior to trial of $2,250,000. Verdict for plaintiff of $250,000 based upon the application of the “continuing violation doctrine” and introduction of evidence spanning eight years (pre-employment, during employment and post-employment). The matter was settled on appeal for a confidential amount.
•Rosas v. Mag Instrument, Riverside County Superior Court, July 1998. Gender discrimination and constructive termination action brought by a gay male against his female supervisor and his employer. Plaintiff presented evidence of harassment, slurs based upon his sexual preference, and intimidation ranging from being ignored to being threatened with a firearm by a co-worker. He claimed that management knew of these actions but did nothing. Following a partial non-suit granted as to the constructive termination claim and a defense verdict on the harassment claim against the female supervisor, plaintiff received a verdict of $900,000.00. Following post-trial motions based upon the inconsistent verdict, the case was settled for a confidential amount.
•Smith & Sosa v. HSQ Technology, Inc., San Francisco Superior Court, February, 2004. Wrongful termination claim brought by two former electricians against their employer, based upon complaints that the electrical work in the BART tunnel being performed by HSQ was unsafe. Plaintiffs presented evidence that work was being done in direct violation of project safety requirements. Demand prior to trial was $600,000. Defense verdict.
•Smith v. Wells Fargo Protective Services, Contra Costa Superior Court, February, 1997. Disability discrimination claim brought by a mentally impaired security guard who was injured on the job and subsequently terminated from his position. He alleged that his mental capacity, which was below normal, was the real reason for his termination. Prior to trial, plaintiff demanded $400,000. Following a three week trial, plaintiff received a jury verdict in the sum of $13,800.00, representing less than ten percent of the offer prior to trial. Judgment satisfied.
Recent Binding Arbitrations
•Politzer v. Robert Talbott, Inc., AAA Mediation, February, 2010. Breach of contract action brought by the former President & CEO, who sought five years severance of $2,000,000 in addition to five percent of the outstanding shares of the company which were valued at approximately $3,000,000. In addition, plaintiff sought a one-time bonus of $150,000 and fifty percent of the sales price for a parcel of real property in New Mexico. Defendants conceded the bonus and after a five day arbitration plaintiff received only his bonus and half of the sales price of the property.
Honors and Recognitions
•Legal Leaders (ALM Publication), Top Rated Lawyers in San Francisco for Labor & Employment
•Who's Who Legal, Management Labour and Employment
Pro Bono and Community Involvement
•Marin County Center for Volunteer Leadership, Advisor
In the News
April 29, 2015
Patrick Mullin Shares Tips for Litigators on Preparing for Their First Trial
April 29, 2015
Jackson Lewis Shareholder Pat Mullin was quoted in the Law 360 article What New Litigators Can Do To Win Their First Trial. View Article (subscription may be required)
October 8, 2014
Jackson Lewis Attorneys Named in 2014 Edition of Who's Who Legal
October 8, 2014
WHITE PLAINS, NY (October 8, 2014) Jackson Lewis P.C., one of the largest workplace law firms in the world representing management, is pleased to announce nine of the firm's attorneys have been recognized in this year's Who's Who Legal list in the “Management Labour & Employment” category. Orange...
Professional Associations and Activities
•American Bar Association
•American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA) (a prestigious invitation-only group of trial attorneys), Advocate
•Association of Northern California Defense Counsel
•San Francisco Bar Association
•State Bar of California