Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW

New York Legal

  •  
  •  

Executives with briefcases, file photo. REUTERS Jonathan Ernst

Gender discrimination lawsuit against KPMG can move ahead

2/8/2013 COMMENTS (0)

By Joseph Ax

NEW YORK, Feb 8 (Reuters) - A proposed gender discrimination class action against accounting firm KPMG brought by five female former employees who claim they were denied pay raises and promotions can move ahead largely intact, a Manhattan federal judge ruled.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman rejected most of KPMG's motion to dismiss the majority of the women's claims, finding that their "allegations suffice to survive at this stage of the proceedings."

In the case the women argue that the accounting firm created a hostile work environment that left female employees lagging behind in pay and promotions, particularly those with children. The lawsuit is seeking $350 million in lost salary and benefits as well as other damages.

In a statement, KPMG said the lawsuit is "entirely without merit."

"Diversity and inclusion have long been priorities for the firm, and they are woven into our culture and everything we do," the company said.

KPMG argued in court papers that the women, as former employees, could not assert class status under a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that derailed a nationwide discrimination class action against Wal-Mart. That ruling, in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, denied certification on the grounds that 1.5 million current and former Wal-Mart female workers could not show they shared common injuries.

But Furman found that KPMG's argument was premature, since the lawsuit had not yet progressed to the class certification stage. It is "plausible" that the women in the KPMG case will provide enough evidence to allow certification, based on their allegations about a number of specific companywide discriminatory policies, he wrote.

Furman limited or struck a handful of claims but allowed the majority of the complaint to move forward.

Katherine Kimpel, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said the decision, together with other rulings on the Dukes issue, served as a rebuke to the "overbroad" application of the Supreme Court case.

The case was brought by law firm Sanford Wittels & Heisler, which has filed a series of gender discrimination suits in recent years against major corporations and settled a similar case against Novartis AG in 2010 for $175 million. The corporations include French advertising company Publicis Group SA, Japanese electronics maker Toshiba Corp, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and health insurer Cigna Corp.

The case is Kassman v. KPMG LLP, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 11-cv-3743.

For the plaintiffs: Katherine Kimpel, Kate Mueting, Katherine Lamm and David Sanford of Sanford Wittels & Heisler.

For KPMG: Cheryl Stanton, Diane Saunders, Peter Hughes and Steven Moore of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart.

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters