Jacqueline F. Langland

While future success isn’t guaranteed based on past results, some of Jacqueline’s favorite litigation-related career highlights include:

• Chairing a two-week jury trial that culminated in a complete defense verdict for her client in a case alleging discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and failure to accommodate. Jacqueline's witnesses at trial included, but were not limited to, the main alleged adverse actor/harasser and the Human Resources Manager responsible for investigating Plaintiff’s numerous internal complaints. Jacqueline argued nearly all pre-trial and trial motions. The verdict in favor of Jacqueline's client was upheld on appeal.
   
• Obtaining early dismissal of a case asserting a private cause of action for civil penalties under FWHFA for failing to meet recordkeeping and posting requirements. The Court found on Motion to Dismiss that there was no private cause of action and dismissed the case against Jacqueline’s client. The issue was a matter of first impression in Arizona state court at the time.
   
• Defending a case raising a niche issue about the damages that could be recovered for purported lactation break and space requirements under the FLSA. After significant discovery and briefing, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of Jacqueline’s client on the FLSA claims, finding Plaintiff had not established recoverable damages.
   
• Defending a client in a lawsuit involving matters of first impression about negative certifications and the five-day designation notice requirement under the FMLA. Jacqueline presented her client's position in an over two-hour oral argument to the Court. The Court granted summary judgment in favor of Jacqueline's client on all but one claim.
   
• Obtaining complete summary judgment for a client in a six-Plaintiff wrongful termination suit under the Fair Housing Act.
   
• Winning a Motion for Sanctions against a former employee’s counsel. The Court ordered opposing counsel to pay Jacqueline’s client over $20,000 in attorneys’ fees because of the successful Motion for Sanctions.
   
• Obtaining early dismissal of an entire case asserting unique claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the ADA.