Premier Philadelphia Employment Law Firm
Sidney L. Gold & Associates, P.C. has been recognized by the Martindale-Hubbell Bar Register as a preeminent law firm in the field of employment law and civil rights litigation. The Firm is exclusively concentrated in the representation of both employees and employers in all aspects of employment related litigation, including claims under federal and state discrimination laws and federal civil rights laws. The Firm has significant experience in representing both private sector and public sector employers, including state universities and municipalities in employment and civil rights matters. The Firm was lead counsel in the nationwide class action against Abercrombie & Fitch. Reported Cases: Pierce, III v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, in the U.S. District Court, ED. Pennsylvania, 02-8063 (2003); Sarah Borse v. Piece Goods, Inc., in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 91-1197; Martin v. Hale Products, Inc., 699 A.2d 1283 (Pa. Super., Aug. 13, 1997) (NO. 03769 PHL 1996); Herman v. City of Allentown, 985 F.Supp. 569, 7 A.D. Cases 1326 (E.D. Pa., Nov. 21, 1997) (No.Civ. A.96-6942); Kania v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, 14 F.Supp. 2d 730, (81 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1042), 74 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 45, 481 (E.D. Pa., Jul 28, 1998); (NO.CIV. A. 97-7136); Davis v. Levy, Angstreich, Finney, Baldante, Rubenstein & Coren, P.C., 20F.Supp. 2d 885, 8 A.D. Cases 1322 (E.D. Pa., Oct 13, 1998); NO. CIV. A. 97-cv-7475); Davis v. Rutgers Casualty Ins. Co., 964 F. Supp. 560 (Dist. NJ. 1997); Langford and March v. City of Atlantic City, 235 F.3d 845 (3d Cir. 2000); Garvey v., Jefferson Smurfit Corp., 2000 WL 15860077 (Ed.PA); Smyth v. Pillsbury Co., 914 F.Supp. 97 (E.D. Pa. 1996); Wilson v. North American Reinsurance Company, in the United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 86-4968 (1989); Cavicchia v. Philadelphia Housing Authority, et al, in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-0116 (2003) Todd v. New England Motor Freight, et al, in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-1684 (2003 U.S. Dist. Lexis 24307); Goodman v. L.A. Weight Loss Ctrs., Inc., in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 04-3471 (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1455); Bootel v. Verizon Directories Corp. in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-1997 (2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12240, June 24, 2004, Decided); Cambria v. Ass'n of Flight Attendants, in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 03-5605 (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6092, 177 L.R.R.M. 2061, April 5, 2005, Decided, Summary judgment granted by Judgment entered by Cambria v. Ass'n of Flight Attendants, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13101 (E.D. Pa., June 30, 2005); Conine v. SEPTA, in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-3858 (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10453; 95 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1185, March 17, 2005, Decided, March 17, 2005, Filed; Loughin v. Occidental Chem. Corp., in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 04-5564 (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11936, June 16, 2005, Decided); Strang v. Ridley Sch. Dist., in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-4625 (2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20993, October 12, 2004, Decided, October 14, 2004, Filed); Reinard v. Ashcroft, in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 02-1886 (2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23693. December 29, 2003, Decided); Willis v. Vie Fin. Group, Inc., in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 04-435 (2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15753; 86 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P41, 895; 21 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1111, August 6, 2004, Decided; Campbell v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., in the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, 03-3159 (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11507; 96 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 55, June 9, 2005, Decided, FOR PUBLICATION; Franks v. County of Lehigh, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 04-2971 (2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 16000, July 14, 2005, Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a), August 2, 2005, Filed, RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT); Walden v. St. Gobain Corp., in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-4768 (323 F.Supp. 2d 637; 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12335, June 30, 2004, Decided); Pamela Diviny v. Village of Cottage Green, Inc., et al, in the U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, 03-5096 (2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22191, November 1, 2004, Decided).
