Amy Buchanan v. Watkins & Letofsky, LLP

I. Factual Background

Beginning in April of 2016, plaintiff worked as a full- time associate attorney at W&L Nevada. Daniel Watkins BUCHANAN V. WATKINS & LETOFSKY

and Brian Letofsky, who were licensed to practice in Nevada and California, owned and were the only partners of W&L Nevada. Likewise, they owned and were the only partners of Watkins & Letofsky, a California limited liability partnership (“W&L California”).

In September of 2016, because of health concerns, plaintiff resigned her position at W&L Nevada. In December of 2016, plaintiff returned to work there. Plaintiff asserts that when she did so, W&L Nevada agreed to accommodate her medical conditions by reducing her expected commitment to 20 hours per week. 1 Plaintiff contends that despite this agreement, W&L Nevada required her to work more than 20 hours per week. In May of 2017, after plaintiff asked for time off to focus on her health, W&L Nevada placed her on an indefinite leave of absence.

II. Procedural Background

In the District Court of Clark County, Nevada, plaintiff filed suit against W&L Nevada. W&L Nevada removed the case to federal court based on federal question jurisdiction. In her…