What is the name of your state? Iowa
I filed discrimination (age & sex) and FMLA violations against a former employer. First went through Iowa Civil Rights, then EEOC, then the "right to sue" steps. My attorney told me all along "we believe you have a strong case". All along I said much of what happened happened behind closed doors. Reply was "not a problem".
During discovery, boxes and binders of personnel records and medical records were supplied. Came time for my deposition - preparation lasted less than an hour and consisted of 3, maybe 4 "simulated questions". My deposition lasted 9.5 hours and they really made me look bad (however, what was presented could have been challenged by my witnesses if it got to that point - another thing I told lawyer all along). Two hours after the deposition, my lawyer called and recommended we drop the case - that the other side was well prepared and we woudl probably lose (discrimination). She also said there was a clear violation of FMLA but b/c you said you said (in deposition) you couldn't afford to take time off without pay, the victory would be a moral victory only and cost you about $3000 - $4000.
Needless to say I am devastated. We spent over 1 1/2 years on this. At one point, I contacted another member of the firm b/c I was concerned over the number of errors in the legal documents filed (she had me attending meetings I never did, misquoted me, had me evicted from an apartment, to name a few).
I was obvious the day of my deposition, we were not prepared. There was nothing presented that my attorney did not have access to before that day. She objected to only a couple of the questions, one of which was a question about an incident that happened to my son AFTER I left the employer being charged. If I didn't have a case after the deposition, then I didn't have a case before it... nothing was presented that my attorney didn't have access to.
I don't know what to do.... do I have any recourse? This is crazy - they said clear violation of FMLA but b/c I can't afford a "moral victory", the violator wins. This part I don't understand.
I filed discrimination (age & sex) and FMLA violations against a former employer. First went through Iowa Civil Rights, then EEOC, then the "right to sue" steps. My attorney told me all along "we believe you have a strong case". All along I said much of what happened happened behind closed doors. Reply was "not a problem".
During discovery, boxes and binders of personnel records and medical records were supplied. Came time for my deposition - preparation lasted less than an hour and consisted of 3, maybe 4 "simulated questions". My deposition lasted 9.5 hours and they really made me look bad (however, what was presented could have been challenged by my witnesses if it got to that point - another thing I told lawyer all along). Two hours after the deposition, my lawyer called and recommended we drop the case - that the other side was well prepared and we woudl probably lose (discrimination). She also said there was a clear violation of FMLA but b/c you said you said (in deposition) you couldn't afford to take time off without pay, the victory would be a moral victory only and cost you about $3000 - $4000.
Needless to say I am devastated. We spent over 1 1/2 years on this. At one point, I contacted another member of the firm b/c I was concerned over the number of errors in the legal documents filed (she had me attending meetings I never did, misquoted me, had me evicted from an apartment, to name a few).
I was obvious the day of my deposition, we were not prepared. There was nothing presented that my attorney did not have access to before that day. She objected to only a couple of the questions, one of which was a question about an incident that happened to my son AFTER I left the employer being charged. If I didn't have a case after the deposition, then I didn't have a case before it... nothing was presented that my attorney didn't have access to.
I don't know what to do.... do I have any recourse? This is crazy - they said clear violation of FMLA but b/c I can't afford a "moral victory", the violator wins. This part I don't understand.