Aimee G. Mackay

Aimee’s representative employment matters include:

• Obtaining summary judgment in wrongful termination and retaliation action brought by former employee of major pharmaceutical manufacturer. Aimee successfully defended the summary judgment win on appeal before Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal (Guyton v. Novo Nordisk A/S).
  
• Obtaining summary judgment in an ERISA class action alleging investor client “knowingly participated” in breach of fiduciary duty by company and principals who engaged in ESOP transaction.
• Following a multimillion dollar jury verdict in an age discrimination case for a major retailer handled by another firm, successfully striking an award of punitive damages through post-trial motions.
• Successfully representing California Employment Law Council and Employers Group as amici curiae in an action in which plaintiffs and their counsel argued for a “heightened standard” of review of certain class settlements to prevent a reverse auction.
• Defending electric vehicle manufacturer in arbitration trial over alleged wrongful termination of sales associate.
• Defending major Southern California hospital chain in a wage and hour class action. Aimee’s strategic advice resulted in a timely and efficient class settlement.
• Defending major insurance provider against class action claims alleging race discrimination and retaliation. Aimee and her team took over for another law firm after the court granted class certification against the defendant; Aimee drafted a motion to decertify the class that was granted.  After Aimee drafted and filed a motion for summary judgment, the case was settled on favorable terms.
• Advising insurance brokerage firm on hiring of employees with restrictive covenant obligations and planning litigation strategy to defend against breach of covenant claims.

Aimee’s representative commercial litigation matters include:

• Defending major moving truck, trailer, and self-storage rental company on appeal after trial court entered a permanent injunction barring the company from using the phrase “confirmed reservation” in its advertising and communications to customers. The appeal focused on the First Amendment implications of the injunction; during briefing of the cause, the class was persuaded to agree to a settlement that dissolved the injunction.
• Successfully defending private college in three separate writ proceedings brought by former students under Title IX obligations.
• Defending major pharmaceutical manufacturers against claims of failure to warn defects brought pursuant to multidistrict litigation proceedings.