Stewart regularly advises employers on compliance strategies involving the full range of laws covering the workplace, including labor standards, equal employment opportunity, and affirmative action compliance for federal contractors; the Americans with Disabilities Act; Federal Fair Labor Standards Act; state wage and hour laws; the Family and Medical Leave Act; the Occupational Safety and Health Act; unemployment compensation requirements; workers’ compensation; veterans’ reemployment rights; drug testing; evaluating employees; the use of contingent employees; and other federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Stewart counsels clients on employment contracts, hiring, handbooks, adverse employment decisions, affirmative action compliance programs, training managers, and immigration compliance. He advises employers in union-management relations, such as union organizing drives and elections, strikes, and collective bargaining negotiations. He has represented and advised the Washington Capitals and Washington Wizards in workers’ compensation, grievances, arbitrations, and other matters.
Stewart has represented employers in state and federal courts and agencies in employment litigation for more than 30 years. For example, he represented a federal manufacturing contractor in a multimillion dollar dispute with OFCCP involving allegations that the client’s hiring and placement processes were discriminatory, its affirmative action plan was not in compliance with federal regulations, and a demand by the government for back pay for hundreds of applicants and employees, hiring of affected applicants, and promotion of affected employees. He represented the lieutenant governor of Virginia in a wrongful discharge case, a former legal counsel to the President of the United States in a sexual harassment case, and a pizza delivery company in a highly publicized civil rights case. He also represented the chairman of the board of a billion-dollar construction company in a breach of employment contract and fraud case, and represented a national residential builder in a well-publicized housing discrimination case. Following a month-long jury trial on a case involving a breach of a covenant not to compete, Stewart recovered a $4.8 million judgment for his client. In another breach of a non-solicitation case in which he represented the defendant, Stewart prevailed on the contract claim and was awarded attorneys fees of nearly $1 million by the trial court.
Stewart has also had significant appellate experience. In responding to a plaintiff’s appeal of a defense judgment in a Title VII matter, he not only was successful in having the judgment affirmed, but also won the first award by the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals of attorney’s fees to a defendant under Title VII. See Harris v. GHA, 662 F.2d 869 (1981). He also handled another appeal that produced an important attorney’s fee decision. See Brooks v. George Hyman Construction Co., 963 F.2d 1532 (1992). In another widely reported matter, in which he was responding to a union’s appeal of a jury verdict under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) in favor of his client, Stewart successfully established important precedents involving the statute of limitations and awards of punitive damages in LMRDA cases. See Quinn v. DiGiulian, 739 F.2d 637 (1984). Stewart also handled several appellate matters involving the District of Columbia Worker’s Compensation Act, litigating important issues in the early days of that law, as well as more recently in the course of his representation of professional sports teams. See George Hyman Construction Co. v. DoES, 498 A.2d 563 (1985); Capital Hilton Hotel v. DoES, 565 A.2d 981 (1989); Washington Capitals v. DoES, 831 A.2d 913 (2003); Washington Capitals v. DoES, 810 A.2d 862 (2002). In addition, Stewart has appeared in the courts of appeals in OSHA matters. See American Iron & Steel Inst.v. OSHA, 182 F.3d 1261 (1999, 11th Circuit). He also litigated an appeal involving a controversial issue under Title VII, in which the DC Circuit granted his client’s request for rehearing, and he presented oral argument to the court en banc. See Aka v. Washington Hospital Center, 156 F.3d 1284 (1999).