Our Attorneys

Barbara Lelli

Attorney Barb Lelli’s practice is dedicated to representing workers in employee rights litigation. This includes employment discrimination and harassment because of race, national origin, sex, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity; medical leave violations; failure to accommodate a disability; and whistleblower retaliation. Before joining the Employee Rights Group, Barb was the Chief Investigator at the Maine Human Rights Commission. Before that, she was an Investigator at the Vermont Human Rights Commission.

Published Case

• Human Rights Commission v Labrie, Inc., 164 Vt 237; 668 A.2d 659.

Selected Publications

• Lelli, B., D.E. Harris, & A. Aboueissa. 2009. Seal Bounties in Maine and Massachusetts, 1888 to 1962. Northeastern Naturalist. 16(2):239–254.
• Lelli, B. and D.E. Harris. 2006. Seal Bounty and Seal Protection Laws in Maine, 1872 to 1972: Historic Perspectives on a Current Controversy. Natural Resources Journal. 46(4):881-924.

Education

• Vermont 4-year Law Office Study Program
• Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI – B.A.

Bar Associations

• Vermont State Bar Association
• Vermont Employment Lawyers Association
• Maine Employee Lawyers Association

Peter Thompson

For over 25 years, Attorney Thompson has represented and fought for the rights of employees. Peter is “AV Preeminent” rated by Martindale-Hubbell©, a well-respected peer review organization that rates lawyers based on input from judges and other well-respected members of the legal community. He has also been designated a New England “Super Lawyer”© from 2007 to the present and is listed in U.S. News “Best Lawyers in America”© directory, the oldest and most highly-respected peer review guide in the legal profession worldwide.

Peter has successfully litigated several nationally-reported cases including Arnold v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 136 F.3d 854 (1st Cir. 1998), Duckworth v. Pratt & Whitney, Inc., 152 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1998), and Hall v. Maine Municipal Employees Health Trust, 93 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D. Me. 2000).

Member: Million Dollar Advocates Forum

New England “Super Lawyer” 2007-present

Education

• J.D., University of Maine School of Law
• Managing Editor, Maine Law Review
• B.A., Bowdoin College

Professional & Bar Association Memberships

• Association of Trial Lawyers of America
• New Hampshire Bar Association
• National Employment Lawyers Association

Published Cases

• Duckworth v. Pratt & Whitney, Inc., 152 F. 3d 1 (1st Cir. 1998) (lower court ruling granting Defendant’s MSJ reversed).
• Arnold v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 136 F. 3d 854 (1st Cir. 1998) (lower court ruling granting Defendant’s MSJ reversed).
• Hall v. Maine Mun. Employees Health Trust, 93 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D. Maine, 2000) (Defendant’s Motion to Remand denied).
• Lafortune v. Fiber Materials, Inc., D. Maine, 2004 (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
• Phair v. New Page Corp., 708 F. Supp. 2d 57 (D. Maine, 2010) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
• Donahue v. Clair Car Connection, Inc., 736 F. Supp. 2d 294 (D. Maine, 2010) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
• Duckworth v. Mid-State Machine Products, 736 F. Supp. 2d 278 (D. Maine, 2010) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
• Jewell v. Lincare, Inc., 810 F. Supp. 2d 340 (D. Maine, 2011) (Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss denied).
• Blanco v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 802 F. Supp. 2d 215 (D. Maine, 2011) (Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss denied).
• Manske v. UPS Cartage Services, Inc., 870 F. Supp. 2d 185 (D. Maine, 2012) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
• Stark v. Hartt Transp. Systems, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 3d 445 (D. Me. 2014) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).

Chad Hansen

Chad’s practice focuses on the representation of employees in litigation. Chad is experienced in disability discrimination, age discrimination, religious discrimination, sex discrimination, whistleblower retaliation, sexual harassment, medical leave violations, and failure to accommodate claims. He has both first chaired and second chaired employee rights cases to winning verdicts. Chad is highlighted in U.S. News “Best Lawyers in America” © directory (Employment Law – Individuals), the oldest and most highly-respected peer review guide in the legal profession. Chad is also rated by Matindale-Hubbell as “AV Preeminent”, which is the top rating one can receive for legal skills and trustworthiness. This honor is based upon reviews from judges and well-renowned figures in the legal community.

In October 2021, Chad first chaired a failure to accommodate case in the U.S. District Court in Bangor and obtained a jury verdict in his client’s favor. The jury awarded $867,000 which included $750,000 in punitive damages.

After graduating from the University of Colorado School of Law, Chad worked for the National Organization for Women (“NOW”) National Judicial Education Program which educates the judiciary with regard to victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. After moving to Maine, Chad worked for three years as a staff attorney for the Disability Rights Center where he focused on disability discrimination in employment, public accommodation, and education. Chad has worked with the Maine Employee Rights Group since 2007 and is a member of the firm. Chad is a former Member and Immediate Past President of the Board of Directors of the Disability Rights Maine.

Chad is also an attorney coach for the Cape Elizabeth mock trial team which won the state championship in 2021.

Education

J.D., University of Colorado School of Law

B.A., Luther College

Reported and Notable Cases

• Austin v. Mainely Constr. Rentals, LLC, No. 2:20-CV-00182-NT, 2022 WL 539311 (D. Me. Feb. 23, 2022) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Corson v. Modula, Inc., No. 2:20-CV-104-DBH, 2020 WL 4194498 (D. Me. July 21, 2020) (Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Denied)
• Bell v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-00501-JDL, 2022 WL 782784 (D. Me. Mar. 15, 2022) (denying defendant’s motion to apply damages caps to jury verdict and upholding $867,000 verdict)
• Bell v. O’Reilly Auto Parts, 972 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2020) (successful appeal in disability discrimination case where court ordered new trial due to error in jury instructions)
• Mullen v. New Balance Athletics, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-194-NT, 2019 WL 958370 (D. Me. 2019) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Morin v. Hannaford Bros. Co., LLC, No. 1:17-CV-50-GZS, 2018 WL 2746570 (D. Me. 2018) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Pennington v. Hannaford Bros. Co., LLC, No. 2:17-CV-00053-JDL, 2018 WL 2746577 (D. Me. 2018) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Bell v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-00501-JDL, 2018 WL 1886491 (D. Me. 2018) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Gagnon v Woodlands Senior Living of Brewer, LLC, No. BCD – CV – 15 – 29, 2015 WL 12851372 (Me.B.C.D. 2017) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Dorr v. Woodlands Senior Living or Brewer, LLC, No. 1:15-CV-00092-JCN, 2017 WL 4329765 (D. Me. Sept. 29, 2017) (Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys Fees and Costs)
• Prescott v. Rumford Hosp., No. 2:13-CV-00460-JDL, 2016 WL 3406079 (D. Me. June 17, 2016) (Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs)
• LaFlamme v. Rumford Hosp., No. 2:13-CV-460-JDL, 2015 WL 4139478 (D. Me. 2015) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Crosby v. F.W. Webb, Co., No. 2:12-CV-135-NT, 2014 WL 1268691 (D. Me. 2014) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Stark v. Hartt Transp. Systems, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 3d 445 (D. Me. 2014) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Manfield v Alutiiq Intern. Solutions, Inc., 851 F.Supp.2d 196 (D. Me. 2012) (Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Denied)
• Manske v. UPS Cartage Services, Inc., 789 F.Supp.2d 213 (D.Me. 2011) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Blanco v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 802 F. Supp.2d 215 (D.Me. 2011) (Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Denied)
• Phair v. New Page Corp., 708 F.Supp.2d 57 (D.Me. 2010) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Exclude Expert Witness denied)
• Duckworth v. Mid-State Machine Products, 703 F.Supp.2d 35 (D.Me. 2010) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Rhoades v. Camden Nat. Corp., 575 F.Supp.2d 260 (D.Me. 2008) (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
• Warren v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 495 F.Supp.2d 86 (D.Me. 2007) (Order on Post Trial Motions granting damages)