Our People

Suzanne Solomon

Of Counsel, San Francisco

415.512.3000
ssolomon@lcwlegal.com

Suzanne Solomon is an experienced trial lawyer who has represented public entities, private companies and individuals in a wide range of employment disputes for more than 18 years.  At Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, Suzanne's litigation practice focuses on defense of single- and multi-plaintiff employment claims for discrimination, retaliation, harassment, violation of wage and hour laws, due process, First Amendment retaliation, and numerous other tort and statutory employment law claims. 

Before joining LCW's San Francisco office, Suzanne was a partner with a San Francisco firm and focused her practice on litigation of employment and class action matters.  She has tried cases before judges and juries in both state and federal courts.  She also has extensive experience representing law enforcement agencies, including winning summary judgment of discrimination claims made against Police Departments and command staff.  Suzanne has also handled appellate matters in state and federal courts, including a case of first impression in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the criteria courts may use in deciding whether to grant interlocutory review of class certification decisions.

Suzanne regularly advises governmental agencies on all aspects of employment law, including employee discipline, leave laws, Americans with Disabilities Act compliance, and investigating and responding to discrimination complaints.  Her practice has included developing and presenting management training on such subjects as due process, reasonable accommodation, privacy, and prevention of discrimination. 

Representative Matters

Appellate

  • Warner et al v. City of Citrus Heights, et al (2010) - Employment discrimination lawsuit in the California Court of Appeal.  The plaintiffs claimed that the City rejected them from probation because of their sexual orientation, and claimed that the Police Department's internal investigation into their misconduct was harassment.  The Court of Appeal agreed with our arguments that the Police Department's use of its internal investigation procedure and its resulting decision to reject the plaintiffs from probation was protected activity under the Anti-SLAPP statute (CCP section 425.16) and ordered the plaintiffs to pay the City's attorneys' fees in the Court of Appeal and Superior Court.

Litigation

  • Hancock v. Plumas County (2012) - Obtained summary judgement in this alleged harassment and discrimination case.
  • Tamara Warner et al. v. City of Citrus Heights et al. (2010) - Plaintiffs, two police sergeants and a police officer, alleged that they were harassed based on their sexual orientiation and released from probation because of their sexual orientation.  They asserted claims against the City for harassment and discrimination and retaliation, and against the individual defendants (the chief, a commander and a lieutenant) for harassment and emotional distress.  Defendants filed an anti-SLAPP motion arguing that the City's actions in investigating one plaintiff for dishonesty and releasing all of the plaintiffs from probation were official proceedings protected under the anti-SLAPP statute.  The trial court denied the motion and Defendants appealed.  The Court of Appeal found that the anti-SLAPP motion should have been granted as to the discrimination and retaliation claims because the City's conduct was protected under the anti-SLAPP statute and Plaintiffs had not established a probability of success on the merits.
  • Silva v. City of Los Altos (2009) - Obtained a summary judgment on behalf of the City of Los Altos in a case in which the Administrative Assistant to the Police Chief claimed that the Police Chief sexually harassed her.

Presentations

Education

  • JD, University of California, Hastings College of Law
  • BA, New York University
To Contact Liebert Cassidy Whitmore:
Los Angeles 310.981.2000 | Fresno 559.256.7800 | San Francisco 415.512.3000 | info@lcwlegal.com
© 2012 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore