People: Kevin R. Brady, Counsel

Photo of Kevin R. Brady, Counsel

Kevin R. Brady

Counsel

Boston
Direct: (617) 946-4979
0
Kevin Brady is Counsel in the Labor & Employment Department of Seyfarth Shaw LLP where he focuses the majority of his practice on defending employers against single plaintiff claims of discrimination and harassment based on sex, race, national origin, age, religion, pregnancy, and disability. Mr. Brady has experience representing employers before federal and state courts, as well as in administrative proceedings and arbitration. He has first chair employment litigation experience at top Am Law firms and a Fortune 500 company.  He has significant experience in representing management of labor-organized manufacturing, staffing, financial services, healthcare, telecommunications, and retail companies.
 
In addition, Mr. Brady provides counseling advice to employers on a range of employment-related issues for compliance with federal and state laws and litigation avoidance strategies.  Mr. Brady has also defended companies against ADA Title III public accommodation actions.
Kevin Brady is Counsel in the Labor & Employment Department of Seyfarth Shaw LLP where he focuses the majority of his practice on defending employers against single plaintiff claims of discrimination and harassment based on sex, race, national origin, age, religion, pregnancy, and disability. Mr. Brady has experience representing employers before federal and state courts, as well as in administrative proceedings and arbitration. He has first chair employment litigation experience at top Am Law firms and a Fortune 500 company.  He has significant experience in representing management of labor-organized manufacturing, staffing, financial services, healthcare, telecommunications, and retail companies.
 
In addition, Mr. Brady provides counseling advice to employers on a range of employment-related issues for compliance with federal and state laws and litigation avoidance strategies.  Mr. Brady has also defended companies against ADA Title III public accommodation actions.

Education

  • J.D., Quinnipiac University School of Law (1999)
    Moot Court Honor Society

  • B.A., University of Connecticut (1994)

Admissions

  • New York
  • Connecticut

Courts

  • Second Circuit Court of Appeals
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York

Representative Engagements

  • Farzan v. Genesis10, et al, No. 14-1265 (2d Cir. Oct. 14, 2015) Affirmed summary judgment to employer, holding "employee" classification under anti-discrimination laws has no bearing on how a company and staffing agency may internally classify and employ workers.
  • Chernov v. Securities Training Corp., Index No. 151682/2013 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. New York Cty. Aug. 31, 2015). Granted summary judgment to employer holding that stress of everyday life is not a disabling impairment under the New York City Human Rights Law.
  • Tronetti-Hotvet v. Jewish Family Services of Northeastern New York, Index No. 4513/2012 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Albany Cty. Nov. 22, 2013). Granted summary judgment to employer, holding employer's statements concerning plaintiff were not defamatory and protected by the common interest privilege.
  • DiStefano, et al v. Communications Workers of America, Local 1101 and Verizon Communications, Inc., No. 10 Civ. 1166 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2012). Dismissed plaintiffs’ Federal and state discrimination claims as barred by the election of remedies provision of the New York State whistleblower law and prior state court judgment.
  • Crawford-Bey v. The New York and Presbyterian Hospital, No. 08 CV 5454 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2011), appeal dismissed (2d Cir. Mar. 8, 2012). Granted summary judgment to employer holding laws exist to protect individuals based on their protected class, not merely to redress any action which an employee perceives to be unfair.
  • Aka v. New York Convention Center Operating Corporation, No. 09 CV 8195 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2011). Granted summary judgment to employer, holding plaintiff’s claims were barred by limitations period and his failure to establish prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation.
  • Wrenn v. Verizon, Index No. 24063/2010 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Kings Cty. May 17, 2011). Granted employer’s motion to dismiss complaint holding employee’s election of administrative forum barred subsequent lawsuit.
  • Ashmeade v. The New York and Presbyterian Hospital, No. 08 CV 1829 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2011). Granted summary judgment to employer holding plaintiff failed to establish race and gender discrimination claims where her employment was terminated after two extended work improvement plans.
  • Nakahata, et al v. New-York Presbyterian Healthcare System, Inc., et al, No. 10 CV 2661 (PAC) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2011). Dismissed putative collective action of registered nurses alleging employer’s automatic meal break deduction policy violated the FLSA and New York Labor Law.
  • Berde v. North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, Inc., Index No. 15320/2004 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Nassau Cty. Nov. 30, 2010). Dismissed employee’s whistleblower claim as barred by the doctrine of laches and employee’s failure to prosecute two years after appellate court modified order granting summary judgment.
  • Crawford-Bey v. The New York and Presbyterian Hospital, No. 08 CV 5454 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2009). Granted employer’s motion to compel former employee’s discovery compliance and awarded monetary sanction.
  • Bernardo v. George Weston Bakeries Distribution, Inc., et al, No. 06-cv-1504 (D. Conn. Mar. 4, 2008). Dismissed putative class action of employees alleging employer’s unused vacation pay policy violated state wage laws and class action allegations failed to rise above the speculative level.
  • Grunberg v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 2008 WL 323940 (D. Conn. Feb. 5, 2008). Granted summary judgment to employer on employee’s FMLA and ADA disability discrimination and various common law claims.
  • Colp v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 05-cv-1214 (D. Conn. Dec. 22, 2007). Granted summary judgment to employer holding alleged “political harassment” of former facilities manager did not support ADEA claim.
  • Pleau v. Centrix, Inc., 501 F. Supp. 2d 321 (D. Conn. 2007). Dismissed discrimination claim of former married employees, holding state law protects the status of being married, not to whom an individual is married.
  • Wilks v. Elizabeth Arden, Inc., 507 F. Supp. 2d 179 (D. Conn. 2007). Granted summary judgment to employer and dismissed alleged hostile work environment claims.
  • Kasper v. City of Middletown, 352 F. Supp. 2d 216 (2005). Granted summary judgment to employer, holding employee’s union organizing activities failed to support discrimination and retaliation claims.

Publications

  • “Review and Update Your Social Media Policy,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (April 2011)
  • “What Are Your Personnel File Obligations?,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (October 2010)
  • “It’s Time to Review and Possibly Update your Privacy and Monitoring Policies,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (April 2009)
  • “New York’s Highest Court Rejects Erosion of Employment At-Will Doctrine,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (April 2008)
  • Co-Author, “Unsettled Questions Cloud Connecticut’s Disability Discrimination Law,” Connecticut Bar Association Labor & Employment Newsletter (Summer 2005)
  • Co-Author, “Terminating an Employee? Beware of Family and Medical Leave Status,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (October 2004)
  • “Is the FLSA Fair to your Dealership?,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (July 2004)
  • “Aid and Abet Discrimination? You Could be Held Accountable,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (May 2004)
  • “State Supreme Court Rejects Compelled Self-Publication Defamation,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (February 2004)
  • “When Employees Are Regarded As Disabled Under the ADA,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (July 2003)
  • “’Under my Care?’ – The Business Necessity Exception for Medical Inquiries,” Connecticut and New York Employment Law Letters, M. Lee Smith Publishers (September 2003)