Practice Areas and Legal Definitions

At-Will Employment and its Exceptions:

Colorado is an "at-will" employment state, which means that either the employer or the employee may terminate the relationship at any time, without notice and for any reason, except those specifically prohibited by law or contract. Nevertheless, there are various exceptions to the employment "at-will" doctrine that may permit a successful recovery by an employee against the employer for a wrongful termination. Nathan Davidovich is experienced in plaintiff's work for employees and defense work for employers. He has had extensive experience in resolving employment related disputes from all of these vantage points through settlement negotiations, administrative processes, and litigation, trials, and appeals in state and federal court. While the courts are very restrictive as to the types of claims that employees can bring against their employers, he has been successful in resolving all of the following types of claims to the satisfaction of his clients:

Discrimination:

State, federal and local law prohibits discrimination against employees or potential employees on the basis of race, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, age or disability. If you think your employer has discriminated against you it is important to contact an attorney as soon as possible. The statute of limitations is very short and you could lose your claim if you do not file quickly. Attorney fees are awarded to plaintiffs who are successful in court. Nathan Davidovich won a jury verdict in one of the few successful and particularly challenging type of cases involving discrimination by a female against a male. In addition, he has successfully resolved to the client's satisfaction, through settlement or trial, numerous cases involving sex, race, disability, age, religion and national origin discrimination.

Sexual harassment is an abuse of an employer's power. There are two types of sexual harassment. Quid pro quo harassment is when an employer requires an employee to perform sexual favors as a condition of employment. A sexually hostile work environment occurs when an employer maintains an environment where offensive conduct of a sexual nature is tolerated or encouraged, and makes others feel uncomfortable. Such conduct as dirty jokes, lewd comments, groping and physical assault may create a sexually hostile environment if it is severe, pervasive and unwelcome. A hostile work environment may also occur on the basis of race, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, disability or age. The statute of limitations is very short and you could lose your claim if you do not file quickly. Plaintiffs who are successful in court are entitled to recover attorney fees. One of the many hostile work environment cases Nathan Davidovich has resolved, to the benefit of his clients, involved a female police officer who was sexually harassed by her supervisors and coworkers. His client was delighted both with the amount that she received through the confidential settlement he negotiated with the police department, as well as the avoidance of the necessity for prolonged litigation, with all of the time and expense inherent in such a process. Whenever possible, he attempts to settle all claims, including hostile work environment claims before trial. However, Nathan Davidovich's extensive trial and appellate experience demonstrate that he is always ready to go the extra mile to advocate for his clients' best interest, either during the negotiation process or in trial.

Wrongful Termination / Breach of Contract:

Contract type claims may be shown in a number of ways, including proof of the failure to follow any mandatory provisions of an employee handbook or other employee policies, or failure to respect promises that an employee justifiably relied upon. Nathan Davidovich obtained a judgment of $800,000 in a wrongful termination/breach of contract case against an employer. His extensive experience in both drafting and litigating employment related contracts, handbooks and policies, places him in an excellent position to analyze the existence of, and to litigate breach of contract claims.

Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy:

Despite the existence of the employment "at-will" relationship, there are some factual situations where the courts will impose legal liability on the employer in a situation where neither a contract nor discrimination existed. One of those exceptions is the public-policy exception to employment "at-will." To assert a claim under this cause of action, the employer’s conduct complained about must concern behavior that impacts the public rather than just the private interests of the employee. Examples include requiring the employee to violate the law, or to cover up wrong-doing committed by the employer. If the employer then retaliates against the employee by termination or other adverse employment action, the employee may have a valid claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Nathan Davidovich has the expertise needed to properly analyze the facts to determine if the factual basis for such a claim exists and to aggressively pursue the interests of his clients.

Retaliation for Whistle Blowing:

Retaliation for "whistle blowing" is a different type of Wrongful Discharge claim. It involves retaliation against an employee for exposing the improper and unlawful conduct of another employee or the employer, within the company hierarchy or outside of the company to, for example, law enforcement officials. Nathan Davidovich's experience in all phases of the litigation process and in all aspects of employment litigation enables him to assertively pursue justice on behalf of his clients.

Failure of Employer to Pay Wages or Salary:

Colorado law requires an employer to pay wages or compensation in a prompt manner following termination of employment. If the employee has been fired, the employer must pay the wages or compensation immediately upon notification of the termination. If the employee voluntarily quits employment, all compensation is due on the next regularly scheduled payday. If the employer refuses to make such payment, the employee must make a written demand for the payment within sixty days after the date of separation. If the employer does not pay within ten days after the receipt of such demand, the employer shall be liable to the employee for a penalty. There are a number of factors which must be evaluated to determine if an employee is entitled to a penalty. If a lawsuit is filed to recover unpaid compensation, reasonable attorney fees are awarded to the winning party.Nathan Davidovich is in an excellent position to recover wage claims and aggressively pursue penalties on behalf of his clients.

Failure of Employer to pay Minimum Wage or Overtime:

Federal law requires that, with limited exceptions, employees be paid at a least minimum wage, as well as time-and-a-half for time worked over 40 hours per week. The exceptions generally fall within 3 categories of employees: Administrative, Professional and Managerial. Even if employees are paid a salary or are given a managerial title, they are still entitled to overtime pay unless their job duties and responsibilities fall within limited exceptions. In addition, in order to lawfully avoid paying overtime, employers are prohibited from making certain deductions. Employees who are successful on these wage claims in court are entitled to their attorney fees. Nathan Davidovich also has extensive experience in this area and is confident of his ability to effectively assert such claims against his clients' employers.

Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Disputes or Denial:

The FMLA generally requires employers with at least 50 employees to allow their employees up to twelve weeks of annual leave to care for the employee's or a family member's "serious health condition." Upon return from FMLA leave, an employee is entitled to keep his/her previous employment position or be given an equivalent position with equivalent pay, benefits and other conditions of employment. An employer is prohibited from interfering with or denying FMLA leave to a qualified employee. It is also unlawful to discharge or discriminate against an employee for the exercise of FMLA rights. Attorney fees may be awarded to plaintiffs who successfully assert FMLA claims in court. Nathan Davidovich successfully negotiated confidential settlement agreements before suit was even filed, where the FMLA rights of employees had been violated. The employees received substantially greater settlements than they had hoped to recover. Nathan Davidovich's experience and expertise make him unquestionably qualified to effectively pursue such claims on behalf of his clients.

Interference with Employee Benefits (ERISA):

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) makes it unlawful for an employer to discharge or discriminate against an employee for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan or to interfere with obtaining benefits to which he is entitled under the plan. Plaintiffs who successfully assert ERISA claims in trial may be granted attorney fees by the court. Nathan Davidovich obtained over $200,000, including attorney fees, for interference with ERISA rights against an employer that terminated his client while he was receiving disability benefits. He then successfully defended an appeal to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals which affirmed the judgment for his client. Nathan Davidovich's experience with ERISA, and other employment-related claims makes him uniquely qualified to obtain a just resolution for his clients.

Discrimination Based on Military Status • USERRA:

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) prohibits discrimination against members and veterans of the military on the basis of their military service and attempts to minimize the disadvantages to their civilian careers as a result of such service. A violation of USERRA occurs even when an employee's exercise of military leave rights is just "a motivating factor" in the employer's action. In other words, if military service is just one of several motivating factors for an adverse employment action, the employee still has a claim against the employer. Plaintiffs who successfully assert such claims in court are entitled to reasonable attorney fees. The extensive experience, expertise, and success of Nathan Davidovich assures that he has what it takes to tackle any valid claim on his clients' behalf.

Extreme and Outrageous Conduct:

Unreasonable or even unlawful termination is not, in itself, outrageous enough to justify a claim for extreme and outrageous conduct. However, there are times when the manner of termination or the employer's conduct otherwise is so outrageous in character and so extreme in degree that a reasonable person would consider the conduct atrocious and going beyond all bounds of decency in a civilized society. It is under these circumstances that a claim for outrageous conduct will arise. An example of such a case is where an employer who, among other things, terminated a disabled employee on Christmas Eve, and then smirked, "have a nice Christmas" as the employee went home to his family with the tragic news. The confidential resolution of that case was considerably greater than the employee had initially hoped. Nathan Davidovich is uniquely qualified to tenaciously pursue any such employment related claims on his clients' behalf.

Negligent Hiring, Supervision, and Retention:

Employers have a duty to act as a reasonable employer would in hiring, retaining and supervising employees in a manner to prevent their employees from harming other employees or members of the public. Negligent hiring, supervision and retention claims arise if an employer fails in this duty. Nathan Davidovich has asserted such claims against an employer that was previously warned that its manager was sexually harassing his secretary and otherwise acting in an out of control manner, but refused to take action to prevent it. The manager then went on to more serious and pervasive harassment. The claim of negligent supervision and retention was made in addition to claims for sexual harassment discrimination. Nathan Davidovich is uniquely qualified to tenaciously pursue any such employment related claims on his clients' behalf.

OTHER SERVICES TO EMPLOYEES

Review of Employment Agreements, Confidential Trade Secret and Non-Compete Agreements:

It is always surprising to see how frequently employees sign employment agreements with no understanding of what the ramifications to their future lives and future careers can be. At the outset of new employment, employees understandably tend to trust that their new employers will treat them fairly and reasonably. However, some of these agreements can greatly restrict employees' ability to continue to pursue their career, use the knowledge that they have gained through their experience, or benefit from the many contacts which they themselves have cultivated through their own hard work. Nathan Davidovich prides himself in his ability to foresee difficulties that may arise from employment related contracts and advise employees on ways to reframe contractual provisions so that both the employees and employers can achieve their goals.

Severance Agreements:

There are times when an Employer, instead of facing court action, will find it less expensive to negotiate a severance package. Likewise, an employee may find it advantageous to negotiate for a favorable severance package and receive immediate benefits rather than dealing with the uncertainty and time delay of litigation. There are many factors to be considered in drafting such an agreement, including the terms, taxability, confidentiality and noncompete provisions. Nathan Davidovich's expertise and extensive experience in negotiating agreements place him in an excellent position to negotiate the terms of severance packages that achieve the goals of his clients.

If you or someone you know in Colorado needs the assistance of an experienced Denver Employment Attorney, call Nathan Davidovich at 303-TALK-LAW (303-825-5529), or complete the contact form provided on this site to schedule your initial consultation. The material included in this Web Site is not intended as legal advice. Readers should not act upon information contained in this material without professional legal counseling. This website is intended for marketing and informational purposes only.

Employment Law Articles

• What Effect Does Service in the Armed Services Have on Your Employment Rights? Click here to read the article.
• Public Policy and Employment at Will in Colorado. Click here to read the article.
• Disability Discrimination in the Workplace. Click here to read the article.
• The "Glass Ceiling" - Has it Prevented Employment to Your Full Potential? Click here to read the article.
• ADEA: Your Age and Your Job. Click here to read the article.
• False Accusations in Job Terminations: Defamation or Slander in Colorado. Click here to read the article.
• Reduction in force – have you been discriminated against? Click here to read the article.

TRIAL EXPERIENCE – COLORADO EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS
Representative Trial and Appellate Experience on Behalf of Employees
Adams vs. Pipelines Inc., Colorado Court of Appeals (Workmen`s Compensation Appeal)

Anderson v. Cambridge Nursing Center, Inc., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Defendant in wrongful discharge and discrimination lawsuit)

Austin v. City and County of Denver, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in ADEA claim)

Black vs. First Healthcare Corp. d/b/a Hillhaven, Denver District Court (Represented Plaintiff in a constructive discharge case involving harassment, slander, outrageous conduct, and breach of contract)

Blodgett and Frank, et al. v. United Air Lines, (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Represented partial class of Plaintiffs (18,000 flight attendants) in class action suit involving Title VII and ADEA claims with class settlement in excess of $30 million plus attorney fees)

Bosse v. Department of Homeland Security, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in ADA claim)

Brender vs. Matsushita Electric Corp. of America, d/b/a/ Panasonic, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a constructive discharge action involving anti- Semitic behavior)

Brewer v. CIBER, Inc., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in lawsuit for breach of contract and violation of FLSA with regard to overtime payment)

Clark v. City of Aurora, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Representation of Plaintiff in Title VII sexual harassment case)

Cobb v. General Cable Industries, Inc., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in
ADEA claim)

Coleman v. City and County of Broomfield, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in ADA claim)

Coley vs. Van Schaack, Denver District Court (Represented Plaintiff in an age discrimination and wrongful discharge claim.)

Crews v. City and County of Denver, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Representation of Plaintiff in Title VII sexual and racial harassment case)

Daley vs. Eastman, Inc., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim involving age discrimination and libel)

Douglas v. United States Department of Interior, United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit (Represented employee in appeal of failure to promote claim)

Engel v. Canyon Resources Corporation, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in constructive claim based on Title VII, and contract claims)

Fischer and Summers v. Adams County School District #12, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiffs in wrongful discharge claims based on Breach of contract and violation of Due Process rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983)

Gaudett vs. Stationers Distributing Co., Denver District Court (Representation of Plaintiff in sexual harassment case.)

Gomes vs. Coors Brewing Co., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim, involving racial discrimination.)

Greer-Carrithers v. Galaxy Logistics, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Tennessee (Representation of Plaintiff in Title VII case)

Harvey vs. Parker Hannifin, Denver District Court (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim involving breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation)

Hubbard vs. Mile High Equipment Co., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim involving age discrimination and violations of the Equal Pay Act)

Johnson vs. Keystone International, Division of Ralston Purina Company, Denver District Court (Represented Plaintiff in an action for injunctive relief and for damages for invasion of privacy)

Krulder vs. Lane Bryant, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim involving sexual harassment, sex and age discrimination and violations of the Colorado Fair Employment Practices)

Lang vs. Lawyers Title Insurance Co., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim involving age discrimination.)

Laird v. County of Gunnison,  United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in wrongful discharge claim)

McClintock v. St. Vrain School District, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented teacher in lawsuit involving violation of the ADA)

Morphis v. Telectronics, United States District Court for District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in jury trial involving reverse sexual discrimination and retaliation)

Naasz v. State of Colorado, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Representation of Plaintiff in Title VII case)

Packer vs. City of Commerce City, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a wrongful discharge claim involving sex and race discrimination and breach of contract)

Padilla vs. The Travelers Insurance Co., United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in a claim involving libel, slander, and age and race discrimination)

Regan v PTC, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented Plaintiff in wrongful discharge claim based on whistle blowing)

Van Anne v. American Airlines and Association of Professional Flight Attendants, United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Represented terminated flight attendant in lawsuit for breach of contract and unfair union representation)

Professional Profile

Attorney Nathan Davidovich places top priority on representing clients vigorously and ethically to achieve the best results possible.

Attorney Nathan Davidovich has been a trial lawyer during his entire career and has appeared in Colorado State and Federal trial and appellate courts as well as trial courts in California, New Mexico and Tennessee. He specializes in employment law and complex civil litigation and has been involved in many jury trials in both State and Federal Courts.

Davidovich Law Firm, LLC is an experienced litigation & problem management law firm. We pride ourselves in handling efficiently & professionally, virtually all kinds of complex litigation. We recognize the importance of protecting our clients' reputations, as well as their financial & professional needs while striving to provide effective, cost-efficient representation in every aspect of our practice. We can help you with your needs by applying our experience, integrity and service.

If you or someone you know in Denver or throughout Colorado needs the legal counsel of an experienced labor and employment attorney, contact Nathan Davidovich today at 303-825-5529, or complete the contact form provided on this site to schedule your initial consultation.

FIRM ADDRESS:

Davidovich Law Firm, LLC
219 S. Holly Street
Denver, CO 80246
Phone: 303-825-5529

EDUCATION:

• University of Denver College of Law, Denver, Colorado, Juris Doctor, 1963
• University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, BA, 1960

COURTS ADMITTED:

• Colorado Supreme Court - 1963
• U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado - 1963
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit - 1964
• United States Supreme Court - 1972

PROFESSIONAL AND CIVIC ACTIVITIES:

• National Employment Lawyers Association
• Colorado Plaintiff's Employment Lawyers Association
• Colorado Bar Association:
  Previously served on:
  • Ethics Committee
  • Labor and Employment Section
  • Litigation Section
• Denver Bar Association:
  Previously served on:
  • The American Civil Liberties Union Legal Panel
  • Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith Executive Committee
  • Legal Awareness Committee of Denver Board of Realtors
• Served on the Board of Directors of the following schools and organizations:
  • Congregation Beth Joseph
  • Denver Lodge #171 of B'nai B'rith
  • Hillel Academy
  • Yeshivas Toras Chaim
  • Talmudic Research Institute
  • Shomrei Efrat