Top Employment Lawyers

When powerful employers retaliate against employees who expose wrongdoing, they’re not just breaking the law—they’re betting you won’t fight back.

Since the first KKC partner started practicing law in 1984, the employment lawyers who founded Kohn, Kohn & Colapinto have set precedent after precendent, enhancing their rights to fight retaliation.

In 1985, KKC partner Stephen M. Kohn wrote the first ever legal treatise on how to win a retaliation case.

In 1989, Stephen along with his brother Michael Kohn, co-authored the Labor Lawyers Guide to the Rights of Whistleblowers. While writing the leading books on whistleblower law, they were winning cases and setting precedents against companies like Duke Power, KBR (now Halliburton), and Texas Utilities.

For example, in 1989-90, they rocked the whistleblower world in winning the first case ever where a whistleblower found a restrictive non-disclosure agreement (NDA) illegal while at the same time permitting the whistleblower to keep all the settlement monies they had obtained pursuant of the illegal agreement. The company lost it’s benefit of the bargain (silenced) and the whistleblower could keep the payoff.

Since then, KKC partners have won historic cases against some of the most powerful corporations in the world and various government agencies.

Although the firm is located in Washington, D.C., they’ve set precedents in the following states:

• Arizona: first hostile work environment case for a whistleblower
• Georgia: first case finding a whistleblower’s one-party taping to constitute a protected activity
• California: first case ever breaking whistleblower rights to a federal prisoner
• South Carolina: first case ever breaking whistleblower protections to an employee at an atomic weapons plant
• North Carolina: first case ever granting a federal employee the right to criticize their agency and paid expense reimbursements by NC environmental activists
• Maryland: first case ever finding that an EPA employee could succesfully sue the federal government under the Safe Drinking Water Act whistleblower law
• Texas: first case ever disqualifying a leading corporate law firm for unethical activity violating a whistleblower’s legal right
• Washington, D.C.: first SEC case under the Dodd-Frank Act finding an non-disclosure agreement (NDA) illegal.

We have aggressively litigated whistleblower retaliation cases under numerous whistleblower laws, prevailing before cases before the Department of Labor, federal courts, and even the Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina.

In addition, the firm has prevailed in numorous precedings in the U.S Courts of Appeal, including the First, Fourth, Firth, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits.

The Types of Employment Cases We Cover

The types of issues our employment law firm has experience with include:

• Negotiating Severance Agreements
• Retaliation
• Discrimination
• Wrongful Discharge
• Hostile Work Environment
• OSHA Whistleblower Investigations
• Illegal NDAs

The attorneys of Kohn, Kohn & Colapinto’s have an unmatched expertise in whistleblower law, having helped draft key anti-retaliation laws and having literally written the book on the subject.

In 2002, KKC lawyers proposed the historic SOX anti-relation law to Congress and worked with the Senate Judiciary Committee on the final legislation. With KKC’s first-hand knowledge of the intricacies of anti-retaliation litigation, this law laid out strong anti-retaliation protections for corporate whistleblowers.

After their groundbreaking books were published in 1985 and 1989, KKC partners have continued to write the leading handbooks and treatises on how whistleblower can win their cases. This includes Concepts and Procedures in Whistleblower Law (2000), Whistleblower Law: A Guide to Legal Protections for Corporate Employees (2004), The Whistleblower’s Handbook (2011), and most recently Rules for Whistleblowers (2023).

But we are more than just employment lawyers. As founders of the National Whistleblower Center, we have authored amicus briefs in numerous cutting-edge supreme court cases; we led the effort to enact Anti-Money Laundering Improvement Act, and have consulted with consulted with congress on the language for the Dodd-Frank Act, and have been the most influential leaders in three separate SEC rulemaking proceedings under Dodd-Frank.

KKC lawyers know the laws, litigated under the laws, helped write the laws, and have written the leading books on the whistleblower laws.

Employment retaliation cases often intersect with our other practice areas, providing multiple avenues for justice and compensation:

• Qui Tam & False Claims Act: If your employer defrauded the government, you may be entitled to substantial rewards (15-30% of recovery) in addition to retaliation protection.
• SEC Whistleblower Program: Securities fraud reports can yield awards of 10-30% of sanctions over $1 million, plus anti-retaliation protection under Dodd-Frank.
• IRS Whistleblower Program: Tax fraud reports may result in awards of 15-30% of collected proceeds, with strong retaliation protections under recent legislation.
• CFTC Whistleblower Program: Commodities fraud cases offer similar reward percentages and retaliation protections as SEC cases.
• Sarbanes-Oxley Act: The leading corporate whistleblower law that covers publicly-traded companies and their agents or subsidiaries.

Our multi-faceted approach means we can pursue every available remedy, often combining retaliation damages with substantial whistleblower rewards that can total millions of dollars.

If you’ve experienced an employment dispute after reporting a concern, contact our employment attorneys today for a free case evaluation. We can explain your legal rights, evaluate your claim, and determine if you qualify for protections, which may include:

• Appropriate severance and settlement agreements
• Reinstatement to your position
• Back pay and front pay compensation
• Compensatory damages for emotional distress
• Attorney fees and costs
• Punitive damages in some cases
• Awards in related actions

Our firm represents whistleblowers facing retaliation both on a contingency and an hourly-fee basis.

Our firm’s history of winning for retaliation whistleblowers dates to 1988.

Carolina Power and Light Co. v. U.S. Dept. of Labor, 43 F.3d 912 (4th Cir. 1995)

This case was another early pioneering case challenging the legality of restrictive non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) that corporations widely used to silence whistleblowers. The firm’s challenge to restrictive NDA commenced in 1988.

By 1995 we have convinced the Labor Department that such agreements needed to be fully struck-down, leaving the whistleblower free to continue to pursue his or her retaliation case and disclose safety concerns to the government.

The Labor Department joined with the Kohn firm in arguing against the legality of settlement agreements with restrictive NDAs. The Fourth Circuit sided with the whistleblower. (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit opinion)

Deltek, Inc. v. Dep’t of Labor, 649 Fed. Appx. 320

Successfully argued appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit expanding the protections afforded corporate employees under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The case set a positive standard regarding the right of employees to remove documents from their worksite. (View Case File)

Gaballa v. Atlantic Group, Case No. 94-ERA-9 (U.S. Dept. of Labor)

The Gaballa case concerned a problem facing most whistleblowers who are not confidential: Blacklisting. Once an employee is branded as a “whistleblower,” it is often tough to get a new job. This case set a powerful precedent for whistleblowers, prohibiting any badmouthing of a whistleblower with future prospective employers. In the case, the whistleblower hired an agency to contact his former employer to determine what type of references it gave him. His former employer stated that Mr. Gaballa had felt he was the victim of “discrimination.” This bad reference triggered liability, and the whistleblower was awarded compensatory damages based solely on getting a bad reference. The company was also prohibited from giving future bad references.

Garner v. M-K Ferguson Corp., 456 S.E.2d 907 (S.C. 1995)

The Garner case was hotly contested in the state courts of South Carolina. The case finally made its way before the South Carolina Supreme Court on the issue of whether or not a corporate employee at the Savannah River nuclear weapons plant (a federal installation) could sue under the state’s whistleblower law and obtain the right to a trial by jury and significant damages. The state’s Supreme Court ruled for the whistleblower, establishing important precedents regarding the rights of employees at federal nuclear weapons facilities to use powerful state laws to protect themselves.

Hasan v. Texas Utilities, 86-ERA-24 (1986)

In perhaps the most controversial decision in an early nuclear whistleblower case, counsel obtained a rare order disqualifying a major corporate law firm due to unethical conduct. The case resulted in the disqualification of the firm and a significant settlement for the whistleblower, who had raised major safety concerns at the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant. (View Case File)

Howard Samuel Nunn, Jr., v. Duke Power Company (1988)

We also set a nationwide legal precedent in the case Howard Samuel Nunn, Jr., v. Duke Power Company. Duke Power expanded the scope of protected activity under the nuclear whistleblower law to include raising safety concerns with non-profit advocacy groups.

Plumley v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 86-CAA-6 (ALJ June 22, 1987)

First-ever successful employment-related whistleblower case on behalf of federal prisoner who exposed hazardous asbestos removal from prison work area. Guards provided confidential supporting information. (View Case File)

Thompson v. U.S. Dept. of Labor, 885 F.2d 551 (9th Cir. 1989)

Set a precedent recognizing the Department of Labor’s authority to review settlement agreements and prohibited the DOL from altering the material terms of an agreement. This case established precedent, which would require the DOL to strike down the enforceability of an entire settlement agreement containing a restrictive nondisclosure agreement. The case received judicial recognition of the requirement that the Department of Labor approves settlement agreements in federal nuclear whistleblower cases. KKC also obtained the first Equal Access to Justice attorney fee award against the Department of Labor under the nuclear whistleblower law.

Weaver v. USIA, 87 F.3d 1429 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (argued)

Recognized right of federal employees to obtain prospective injunctive relief in federal court (without exhausting administrative remedies with the Merit Systems Protection Board) in cases involving violation of First Amendment rights.

Our leading whistleblower law firm has consistently won cases that have shaped whistleblower protection law.

In addition, we obtained the largest award ever given to an individual whistleblower (at the time), won numerous reward and retaliation cases, and have worked with Congress and executive agencies in drafting the laws and rules governing whistleblowers. Our work has established crucial legal precedents protecting whistleblowers’ First Amendment rights, challenging illegal NDAs, and ensuring proper compensation for retaliation victims.

Regardless of whether you work in healthcare, hospitality, transportation, defense, technology, financial, or service industry, our attorneys have your back and will seek out the maximum compensation, protection, and justice possible.

Timeline Expectations
Every case is unique and depends on each law. Some cases resolve in months; others may take several years depending on complexity and other factors. Cases involving multiple agencies or reward programs may take longer but often yield larger recoveries.

At Kohn, Kohn & Colapinto, we’ve seen it happen too many times: dedicated employees who do the right thing by reporting fraud, safety violations, discrimination, or other workplace misconduct are met with retaliation instead of recognition.

If you’ve experienced demotion, termination, harassment, or other adverse actions after raising concerns about wrongdoing, you are not alone—and you may have powerful legal protections. Contact our firm today for a free and confidential case evaluation.

Note on Intake Process
If we are interested in your case, we will review the request, respond, and potentially assign it to one of the partners. We encourage the use of secure devices, creation of new email accounts, and avoidance of social media to protect client identity.