Stevenson Marino LLP

09/21/2025

Results Matter: $1,800,000 age discrimination settlement achieved for a client previously earning an annual salary of just over $150,000.

In this case, the employer repeatedly inquired as to when our client, who worked for the employer for a very long time, would “retire.” The employer believed questions concerning my client’s retirement was fair game because they were doing “succession planning.” The employer ended up terminating our client for “cause” after it was clear our client would not willingly retire.

Q. Why were we successful? A. We believed in our client. The employer’s justification for termination didn’t make logical sense to us. As a result, we waited for them to memorialize their position in an EEOC position statement, then commenced litigation. Based on our belief in our client, we invested hundreds of attorney hours, tens of thousands of dollars, took and defended nearly a dozen depositions, hired experts, and were ready for trial. It was this full-court-press mentality that resulted in the life-changing outcome for our wonderful client. Ultimately, we elecited evidence to show that the position statement was false.

While we were dead set on a million-dollar+ outcome from the beginning, opposing counsel kept telling us that we were “on another planet” with our demands. I suppose it was opposing counsel who was on the wrong planet.

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

08/12/2025

Another firm outing in the books! Apologies to opposing counsel for the calls we took with shotgun blasts in the background. Ha.

Great time at Orvis Shooting Grounds followed by the vineyards, then by a steak house.

; ; ; ; ; LoveWhatYouDo

07/23/2025

We’re thrilled to announce that, as a result of the work from these future lawyers, we initiated a lawsuit and obtained final approval last week of a $10.6M settlement.

While the wheels of justice take time, they do turn. This case involved an employer’s failure to pay overtime and spread of hours pay to over a thousand of their employees.

; ; ; ; ;

06/02/2025

We are thrilled to announce that Michael R. Minkoff, Esq. has joined Stevenson Marino LLP as a partner. With twelve years of experience in the legal field, Michael is now our fifth full-time attorney, significantly enhancing our team's expertise.

Michael brings a wealth of knowledge in employment law, having dedicated his career to employment litigation. His extensive background includes representing clients in various areas, such as discrimination, harassment, retaliation, whistleblowing, class and collective actions, and severance negotiations.

We are confident that Michael’s deep understanding of employment law will make him an invaluable asset to the Firm. We couldn’t be happier to welcome him to the Stevenson Marino family! Please join us in extending a warm welcome to Michael!

(We note that we're always looking for great talent and presently looking for a Spanish-speaking administrative assistant and/or paralegal).

; ; ; ; ; ;

The A-Team now includes: Jeffrey Maguire; J.R. Stevenson; Michael R. Minkoff, Esq.; Paul Tsenesidis; and myself.

09/17/2024

Great seats, great game, and a great team of attorneys!

08/09/2024

A great firm outing! We took our combined 55 years of legal experience and tested our sporting clay shooting skills. Was a great day!

;

11/03/2023

And just like that, another milestone law school reunion. Seems like we didn’t miss a beat. Always miss my old classmates!

Thank you St. John’s Law ‘07

10/25/2023

In one of the most egregious cases of age discrimination my office has prosecuted, I deposed the decision-maker, executive. I inquired why he wanted to cut the deposition short that day. Below are rough sections of the transcript for your amusement.

Q. Your attorney has indicated we have a hard stop at [3]:00 p.m. today. What are you doing at 3:00?
A. Witness: I am doing something that does not involve this deposition.
Q. That's fine. I get to know what that is, please tell me.
A. Witness: I have an appointment somewhere else at 3:30.
Q. And where is that appointment and for what is that appointment for?
A. Witness: Is that something I need to answer?
[W’s Attorney objects; we note his objections are unfounded and demand an answer].
Q. And so, [Witness], please advise why we have to conclude this deposition the 3:00 p.m.?
[W’s attorney continues to object; we threaten to call the judge should the witness refuse to answer].
Q. So I'm asking right now, [Witness], what are you doing at 3:30 p.m. today?
A. I have an appointment to meet some friends to play golf at 3:30.
Q. So because of your golf we have to conclude your deposition at 3:00 p.m.?
A. I would appreciate that if possible.

*Unfortunately, the Witness did not end up making his t-time that day.

This case involves our 60+ year-old client, who worked faithfully for the employer for over 20 years and was fired after repeatedly being asked (over several years) when our client would retire. When our client refused to retire and made a complaint, our client was fired under the guise of a performance issue. Of course, there was no performance issue and, even if there was, Defendants did not follow their own progressive discipline policy (requiring verbal counseling, written warning, suspension, then termination). On top of it all, Defendants' stated justification in their position statement for terminating my client has been proven false.

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

08/29/2023

Future lawyers in training at Stevenson Marino LLP. They did a great job and had no paper cuts! Win-win.

;

05/19/2023

We stand up for those who are unfairly and unlawfully treated. Here’s our interview on Fox this morning.

; ; ;

Attorney Justin Marino defends pregnant nurse who was placed on leave over a viral bike dispute.

05/12/2023

It was an honor to argue before the Second Department Appellate Division today. The professionalism, the atmosphere, the law - love it and wish I could argue there everyday. Looking forward to the Court affirming the lower court’s decision to deny LIU’s motion to compel arbitration (I.e., securing my client’s day in court in front of a jury).

Administrators at LIU would be interested to know that LIU’s attorney argued today that the right to reinstatement, as contained in my client’s appointment letter, was “meaningless.” For those not in the educational space, faculty members leave the protections of their union to accept a role as an administrator (I.e., Dean). Administrators are employed at will and their employment is subject to the whim of the President. Because of this, an appointment letter is given to the faculty members noting that they have the “right to return to their faculty position.” This is the only safeguard available to administrators and as such, it is critical. It is this safeguard we seek to enforce and the one which LIU’s counsel said was “meaningless.”

Fortunately, contracts matter, and I believe the Court recognized the ridiculousness of LIU’s position.

; ; ; ; ;

04/28/2023

Oh boy, this one is really going to hurt.
Nassau County: time to pay up ($100,000,000 M).

Today we filed a lawsuit against Nassau County in federal court. In this case, Nassau County officials improperly targeted our client, an metal recycling business. Nassau County falsely claimed our client was responsible for catalytic converter thefts and shut down his business. In what we would expect to see in an autocratic government, Nassau County confiscated millions of dollars in currency, equipment and materials, representing the entirety of our client’s business. They literally took away our client’s livelihood.

Mere hours after the seizures, Nassau County held press conferences falsely claiming that both the catalytic converters seized were stolen (they were not stolen) and our client was part of criminal organization consisting of catalytic converter theft ring (he was not). Despite the widespread defamatory allegations, nearly five months have passed since the raid and our client was neither arrested nor charged with a crime. Even worse, Nassau County has refused to return our client’s property and did not provide our client with a constitutionally-required hearing. In short, Nassau County got the wrong guy/business. All of this was for headlines at the cost of an honest, taxpaying citizen.

The damages are significant, as our client had a $100 million dollar business. His relationships, his contracts, his equipment, and his business is forever gone. He now has nothing. Nassau County will be picking up the tab for this grotesque abuse of power.

; ; ; ; ;