Testimonials and Case Studies
Lee Labor Law is trusted to handle sensitive workplace matters requiring independence, discretion, and sound judgment. The following testimonials and representative investigations reflect the firm’s approach to workplace issues. Certain facts have been modified or omitted to protect confidentiality.
What People Are Saying
“Christine’s investigative report was clear, thorough, and easy to follow. She explained the evidence, credibility assessments, and reasoning behind her findings in a way that made a complex matter understandable and gave counsel and the client confidence in the conclusions.”
“Christine is extremely smart, knowledgeable, thorough, and patient. She explains complex issues clearly and makes an overwhelming process feel manageable.”
“Christine brought the right combination of professionalism, judgment, and sensitivity to a very difficult workplace matter. She was thorough, responsive, and thoughtful throughout the process, and her investigation gave us confidence that the issues had been handled fairly and carefully.”
“Christine has served as our outside employment counsel for many years and is a true partner to our People team. She brings a thoughtful, responsive, and steady presence to every engagement. Her strategic counsel has played a meaningful role in helping us manage risk and prevent issues before they escalate.”
Representative Investigations
Investigating Allegations Involving Senior Leadership
The Challenge
An organization retained Lee Labor Law to investigate allegations of sex harassment and retaliation involving a senior executive and the Chair of the Board.
Because the allegations involved individuals at the highest levels of the organization, the investigation presented challenges beyond the underlying factual questions. Witnesses were navigating sensitive workplace and governance relationships, the parties held significant organizational influence, and confidence in the independence of the investigative process was essential.
How We Approached It
Lee Labor Law established an investigative process designed to reinforce neutrality from the outset. Interviews were conducted carefully and independently, with particular attention to allowing witnesses to provide complete accounts without assumptions based on title, authority, or organizational role.
The investigation involved numerous interviews and review of relevant documents and communications. Given the sensitive nature of the allegations, interviews were conducted using a trauma-informed approach while maintaining the neutrality and evidentiary rigor necessary for a fair workplace investigation.
The evidence was assessed across witness accounts, contemporaneous communications, surrounding circumstances, and credibility considerations to develop a complete factual record.
Why It Mattered
When allegations involve senior leaders, employees and decision-makers must have confidence that the investigative process is not influenced by position or organizational hierarchy.
By providing an independent process and a clearly developed evidentiary record, Lee Labor Law gave the organization a reliable foundation for addressing the allegations and moving forward with informed decision-making.
Certain facts have been modified or omitted to preserve confidentiality.
Assessing Credibility When Direct Evidence Is Limited
The Challenge
An employer retained Lee Labor Law to investigate a serious sexual harassment allegation involving a senior manager and subordinate employee. The alleged conduct occurred after hours with no third-party witnesses or video evidence.
The investigation was further complicated by circumstances that could support competing interpretations of the parties’ relationship, as well as the absence of potentially relevant electronic communications.
How We Approached It
With no single piece of evidence capable of resolving the allegation, the investigation focused on building and testing each party’s account against the entire evidentiary record.
Interviews explored not only what each person recalled about the alleged incident, but also the surrounding circumstances and the parties’ interactions before and afterward. Available documents, admissions, and other evidence were evaluated for corroboration or inconsistency.
The credibility assessment considered multiple factors—including consistency, plausibility, corroboration, motive, and whether portions of either account were supported or contradicted by other evidence—rather than relying on any single factor or assumption.
Why It Mattered
The matter required a careful distinction between conduct that might raise questions and evidence sufficient to establish a particular allegation. By documenting the competing evidence and explaining the credibility analysis step by step, Lee Labor Law provided the employer with a clear and defensible basis for understanding how the evidence had been evaluated.
Certain facts have been modified or omitted to preserve confidentiality.
Preserving Investigative Independence Amid Fairness Concerns
The Challenge
An employer retained Lee Labor Law to investigate a serious sexual assault allegation while a separate law enforcement investigation remained pending.
During the workplace investigation, one of the parties retained counsel and raised concerns about whether the employer was handling the matter fairly and impartially. That created an additional layer of risk: the employer needed to continue addressing its workplace obligations without appearing to control or influence the investigative process.
How We Approached It
Because Lee Labor Law had been retained as an independent investigator, the fact-finding process remained separate from the employer’s internal decision-making.
The investigation proceeded with clear attention to neutrality, procedural fairness, and the respective roles of the investigator, employer, counsel, and law enforcement. Communications and interviews were handled carefully so that concerns raised by counsel could be addressed without compromising the independence of the investigation or interfering with the separate criminal process.
The focus remained on developing the available workplace evidence and ensuring that each party had a meaningful opportunity to provide information relevant to the allegations.
Why It Mattered
Retaining an independent investigator gave the employer greater separation from the fact-finding process at a time when the fairness of that process was being challenged.
That independence helped reduce the risk that investigative decisions would be perceived as employer-driven and provided the organization with a more defensible process for addressing an exceptionally sensitive allegation while a parallel police investigation was underway.
Certain facts have been modified or omitted to preserve confidentiality.
Evaluating Discrimination Allegations Following Performance Management
The Challenge
An employer retained Lee Labor Law to investigate allegations of race- and gender-based discrimination raised by an employee following a performance-related employment action.
The matter involved a California workplace with a diverse employee population and required careful analysis of whether the employee’s treatment reflected unlawful bias, inconsistent application of workplace expectations, or legitimate performance management.
How We Approached It
The investigation examined the employee’s allegations in the context of the broader workplace record, including relevant performance history, management practices, comparator evidence, witness accounts, and available documents.
Particular attention was given to whether similarly situated employees were treated consistently, whether the stated reasons for the employment action were supported by contemporaneous evidence, and whether race or gender appeared to influence the decision-making process.
The investigation also evaluated the credibility and consistency of the parties’ explanations and considered the workplace context without making assumptions based solely on demographics or the timing of the complaint.
Why It Mattered
Discrimination complaints arising from performance management often require careful separation of perceived unfairness from evidence of unlawful bias.
By independently examining the employment decision, comparator evidence, and surrounding circumstances, Lee Labor Law provided the employer with a clear factual record and a reasoned basis for evaluating whether the challenged action was supported by legitimate, nondiscriminatory considerations.
Certain facts have been modified or omitted to preserve confidentiality.
Distinguishing Unpopular Management Decisions from Discrimination and Retaliation
The Challenge
A public entity retained Lee Labor Law to investigate allegations of gender-based discrimination and retaliation involving a senior director and another employee.
The director had a reputation for being unpopular, and the complaint arose in part after the employee was cited for a workplace dress-code issue. Because the individuals involved were of the same gender, the investigation required careful attention to the actual evidence of motive rather than assumptions based on the nature of the allegation or workplace sentiment toward the director.
How We Approached It
The investigation examined the challenged employment actions in context, including the circumstances surrounding the dress-code issue, the director’s stated reasons for the action, treatment of other employees, relevant policies and practices, witness accounts, and available documents.
Particular attention was given to whether similarly situated employees were treated consistently, whether the director’s decisions were supported by legitimate workplace considerations, and whether there was evidence connecting the challenged conduct to gender or protected activity.
The investigation also separated evidence bearing on discrimination and retaliation from broader concerns about the director’s management style, popularity, or interpersonal approach.
Why It Mattered
Workplace complaints can become especially difficult when a manager is widely disliked, because negative perceptions may influence how otherwise legitimate decisions are interpreted.
By focusing on motive, consistency, comparator evidence, and the factual basis for the challenged actions, Lee Labor Law provided the public entity with an independent analysis of whether the conduct reflected unlawful discrimination or retaliation, or instead arose from nondiscriminatory management decisions.
Certain facts have been modified or omitted to preserve confidentiality.