Magid & Williams

Magid & Williams

Magid & Williams, P.A. was founded in 2005 in Jacksonville, Florida. Len Magid and Dan Williams have over 40 years combined legal experience, and both lawyers are Board Certified by the Florida Bar as Specialists in Labor and Employment Law.

Firm Overview

The firm focuses its practice on labor and employment law, representing primarily employees. The firm represents clients in cases involving sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of gender, pregnancy, age, race, national origin, disability, religion, etc. The firm also represents employees in cases involving family and medical leave, unpaid wages and overtime claims, convenants not to compete, employment contracts, whistle-blower retaliation, workers compensation retaliation, and all other aspects of labor and employment law.

The law firm of Magid & Williams received an "AV" peer rating in the Martindale Hubbell Law Directory. This is the highest possible rating. Both individual lawyers also attained the highest "AV" rating. Mr. Magid and Mr. Williams give personal attention to each client in advising them and aggressively advocating for their interests.
Main Office
Main Office
3100 University Boulevard, South, Suite 115
Jacksonville  FL  32216-2737
  • 904-725-6161
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating in the terms and conditions of employment on the basis of race, national origin, religion, sex, gender, and pregnancy. The federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits covered employers from discriminating on the basis of age (with regard to employees who are 40 years or older), and the Americans With Disabilities Act prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of disability and may require employers to accommodate disabled employees depending on the circumstances. The Florida Civil Rights Act similarly prohibits discrimination on the basis of all these same factors, and also prohibits discrimination on the basis of marital status.

In appropriate circumstances, employees may attempt to prove discrimination by relying upon direct evidence and/or circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence may include comments that are made by someone who makes or influences the challenged decision, such as slurs and epithets, insults related to the protected factor, discriminatory or stereotypical comments, etc. The use of circumstantial evidence to prove a discriminatory motive may take different forms, the most common of which is known as "pretext." If a reason given for the termination or the challenged decision is found to be pretextual, this may lend itself to an inference that the decision was motivated by the unlawful factor. Proof of pretext can include evidence that the reason given by the employer was dishonest, inconsistencies relative to the treatment of other similarly situated employees, suspicious timing in appropriate cases, etc.

The firm represents employees in discrimination cases involving all of the above factors. Employment discrimination issues typically arise with regard to employees who have been terminated. Discrimination issues can also arise, however, with regard to other matters such as demotion, denial of promotions, compensation, discipline, suspensions and other terms and conditions of employment. The laws prohibiting employment discrimination also prohibit sexual harassment, and harassment based on race or other protected characteristics.

The matter of whether a particular type of discrimination is legally prohibited, and the matter of whether unlawful discrimination can be proven, are complex questions that will depend on the facts and circumstances. Those who think they may possibly have an employment discrimination claim should consult with counsel.
Overtime Pay
The firm of Magid & Williams represents employees seeking to recover unpaid wages and unpaid commissions. Although not every employee is entitled to receive commissions after his or her employment comes to an end, the question of whether there is a contractual right to such payments will vary with the circumstances of each case.

The firm also represents employees seeking to recover unpaid overtime. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires covered employers to pay a minimum wage to its employees and to pay overtime (one and a half times the regular hourly rate) to employees who work in excess of 40 hours per week. Not every employee is entitled to receive overtime pay, since the FLSA and corresponding government regulations contain numerous exemptions. This includes the "white collar" exemptions for executive employees, administrative and professional employees, and employees working in an outside sales capacity. All of the elements of these and other exemptions must be proven as a defense by employers seeking to take advantage of the exemption. The question of whether an exemption applies is a fact intensive inquiry and will depend on the circumstances in any given case. Employees who believe that their overtime rights may have been violated should consult with counsel.

The title of an employee's position will not, by itself, render the employee exempt from overtime. The fact that an employee is paid a salary, and not paid on an hourly basis, will not necessarily render the employee exempt from overtime. In fact, the main issue in many contested cases is whether the employee has been wrongfully characterized as exempt. This depends on the exact nature of the employee's duties. Again, employees who believe that they may have an overtime claim should consult with counsel.

Employees in overtime suits may seek their unpaid overtime for the last two years, and may go back three years in the case of a willful overtime violation. In appropriate cases, employees may also seek liquidated damages (in the same amount as the unpaid overtime), unless the employer can demonstrate that it acted in good faith.
Sexual Harassment
In the last several years, many of the most valuable employment discrimination cases have been based on sexual harassment or harassment based on other protected factors such as race, etc. In order for employees to successfully pursue a sexual harassment claim, there are a number of elements that must be proven. In cases of hostile environment harassment, employees must show that the harassment was unwelcome and was based on or motivated by sex, gender, or one of the factors that are protected by the civil rights laws. Employees must also prove that the harassment was sufficiently pervasive or severe such that it affected the terms and conditions of their employment. The factors to be considered include: whether the conduct was extreme; whether the conduct occurs on an isolated or sporadic basis, or whether it occurs on a daily or regular basis; whether the conduct is physically threatening; and whether the conduct resulted in physical contact. Employees may also attempt to prove a claim by showing that the harassment affected tangible aspects of their job (e.g. affected their pay), and/or that the terms of their employment were conditioned upon whether the employee submits to sexual advances or requests for sexual favors (also know as quid pro quo sexual harassment).

If an employee can prove that hostile environment sexual harassment occurred, there must also be a basis to hold the employer liable for the acts of sexual harassment done by an individual supervisor or co-employee. Although the exact standard is different for harassment by co-workers and harassment by supervisors, the question of whether an employer is responsible for the harassment generally depends upon whether the employer has a sexual harassment policy; whether the employee appropriately complained of sexual harassment and/or whether the employer knew about it; and whether the employer took remedial action or acted appropriately to stop the harassment. It should further be noted that employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees who make a good faith and reasonable complaint of alleged unlawful harassment.

Conduct that may constitute sexual harassment can include: sexual jokes and innuendo; sexual or gender related insults or epithets; repeated sexual advances or requests for sexual favors; unwelcome touching of a sexual nature, groping, etc.

The matter of whether harassment is sufficiently pervasive or severe, and the matter of whether the employer may be held responsible for the harassment by individual supervisors or co-workers, are fact intensive inquiries that depend on the specific circumstances of each case. Employees who believe that they may have a claim for unlawful sexual harassment should consult with counsel.
The Jacksonville law firm of Magid & Williams represents employees who have applied for unemployment compensation benefits. When employers contest a claim for unemployment compensation benefits, this is typically done on the grounds that the employee is supposedly guilty of serious misconduct connected with the work. The employer has the burden of proving misconduct. The law firm of Magid & Williams represents individuals during the unemployment appeal telephone hearing. During such hearings, witnesses testify and may be crossed examined. Both sides can rely on documents or exhibits if they are timely submitted before the hearing. Our lawyers can help you in presenting evidence, making any necessary objections, examining and cross examining witnesses, and making a closing argument on your behalf. Those who are considering legal representation for unemployment claims should contact Magid & Williams, PA.
Wrongful Termination
The Jacksonville law firm of Magid & Williams represents clients in many different types of wrongful termination cases. Although there are exceptions, employment "at will" is the general rule in the state of Florida. This means that employees can be terminated at will, for any reason or no reason at all. Some employees, however, may have an enforceable employment contract if it specifies a certain term of employment. There are also statutory exceptions to the employment "at will" rule and employees can not be terminated on the basis of protected characteristics including: race, religion, national origin, sex, gender, pregnancy, disability, age (if 40 years or older), and may not be retaliated against for having complained about alleged unlawful discrimination based on one of these factors. Employees are also protected from unlawful Whistle-Blower retaliation, and retaliation for having asserted ones rights under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), retaliation for filing a workers compensation claim, retaliation for complaining about unlawful pay practices such as minimum wage or overtime violations, etc. The exceptions to the "employment at will" rule also prohibit employers from discriminating against those who serve in the military. Furthermore, some employees are protected by unions and collective bargaining agreements. Some public employees may have Civil Service protection, or may be protected by the Public Employee Relations Commission ("PERC") for state employees, or the Merit Systems Protection Board for federal employees, or other legal protections for which public employees would be entitled to due process and an administrative hearing.

Given the numerous exceptions to the "employment at will" rule (many of which are mentioned above) and due to the complex nature of whether any of these exceptions are applicable in any given case, it is not possible for this subject matter to be fully covered on this website. If you believe that you may possibly have a wrongful termination claim, you should consult with counsel.

Leonard S. Magid

Leonard ("Len") S. Magid is a Florida Board Certified Labor and Employment Law Specialist and is one of the founding members of Magid & Williams, P.A. in Jacksonville, Florida. The firm limits its practice in the area of labor and employment law, representing primarily employees. Mr. Magid received his Juris Doctor Degree from Brooklyn Law School in 1983. He has practiced labor and employment law for 20 years. He earned the highest "AV" peer rating in the Martindale Hubbell Law Directory. He has been selected as a Super Lawyer in employment litigation by his peers for the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012.

Mr. Magid is one of only several attorneys in the City of Jacksonville who argued a case before the United States Supreme Court. Mr. Magid also authored the Civil Restitution Lien Act enacted by the Florida Legislature in 1994. This law was designed to protect crime victims. He is an active member of the Florida Chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association.

Mr. Magid is admitted to practice in all Florida courts, he is also admitted in the state of New York, the United States District Courts for the Middle and Northern Districts of Florida, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and the Supreme Court of the United States of America. His experience includes representing employees in casing involving sexual harassment and discrimination based on gender, pregnancy, age, race, national origin, disability, and religion. He also has experience representing employees involving family and medical leave, unpaid wages, and overtime claims under the FLSA, non-compete, employment contracts, whistleblower retaliation, FMLA retaliation interference, workers compensation retaliation and other aspects of labor and employment law.

Practice Areas:
Labor and Employment

Admitted: 1984, New York; 1987, Florida

Law School: Brooklyn Law School, J.D.

Member: Florida National Employment Lawyers Association.

Born: Brooklyn, New York
  • Brooklyn Law School
    Juris Doctorate

* Nolo has confirmed that every member attorney has a valid license and is in good standing with the state agency that licenses lawyers. Any past disbarments and suspensions (with possible exceptions for minor violations or nonpayment of dues, in our discretion) will be indicated accordingly in the badge. Member attorneys are required to notify Nolo immediately if they become the subject of any disciplinary action by any state licensing agency.