News / Significant Cases
Significant Cases
September 24, 2025
The Royal Law Firm is proud to announce that we have been ranked in the inaugural Chambers Spotlight Massachusetts Guide, which is a prestigious recognition from the internationally renowned legal research company Chambers and Partners! We are honored to be recognized for our exceptional expertise in Labor & Employment law. This ranking reflects our unwavering commitment to delivering top-tier legal counsel to businesses throughout the Commonwealth and beyond. Only 2% of attorneys are ranked by Chambers. The Royal Law Firm is the only Labor & Employment firm ranked in Springfield, MA. This award highlights small and mid-sized firms with a proven record of excellence and partner-level attention to client matters. Chambers Spotlight is a new guide designed to showcase the very best boutique and mid-sized firms across key U.S. legal markets, focusing on firms that combine regional insight, national impact, and client-focused service. About The Royal Law Firm The Royal Law Firm is a New England-based, women-owned law firm that exclusively represents businesses. Our attorneys are known for their aggressive litigation strategy, proactive employment law counseling, and commitment to understanding every client’s unique business model and goals. We are proud to be certified as a Women-Owned Business through state and national organizations including WBENC, NAMWOLF, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Supplier Diversity Office. The Royal Law Firm was founded by Amy Royal in 2008 with a mission to promote diversity in the legal field, serve businesses exclusively, and give back to her hometown community. As a seasoned trial lawyer with over 25 years of civil litigation experience representing companies, Amy specializes in employer-side employment law, business tort defense, labor law, and corporate transactions. She has successfully defended clients in individual and class action cases involving wage and hour issues, discrimination, harassment, FMLA, OSHA, ERISA, and more. Amy also advises on union matters, HR policies, workplace investigations, and affirmative action compliance. Her commercial litigation work spans business torts, unfair competition, and contract disputes, while her transactional practice includes drafting employment agreements, vendor contracts, and regulatory compliance strategies. Our recognition in the Chambers Spotlight Guide reflects the dedication and excellence of our entire team. Thank you to our clients, peers, and community for your continued trust and support. We look forward to continuing to serve you with excellence.
August 18, 2025
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on race, color and mental disability. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and complainant could not prove that they experienced an adverse employment action. The CHRO agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client due to a lack of reasonable cause.
June 18, 2025
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on race, color and sex. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant was not subjected to any adverse employment action and thus could not establish a prima facie cause of discrimination. Royal attorneys also argued that Complainant’s allegations of a hostile work environment and harassment fell short. The Complainant was performing her jobs duties in such a way that it was putting the employer at risk. Complainant’s direct supervisor devised a plan to mitigate the risk the employer was facing and help Complainant improve the quality of her work going forward. It was not disciplinary action, and Complainant was considered an employee in good standing at the time she filled her allegations of discrimination. CHRO agreed that there was insufficient proof to sustain a discrimination or hostile work environment claim and that “if anything, it revealed a disagreement in management styles that does not amount to discrimination and/or harassment under Connecticut law,” and dismissed the case against our client.
March 24, 2025
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination for their client. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on race, color, and retaliation. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and complainant could not prove that they experienced an adverse employment action. The MCAD agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client due to a lack of probable cause.
March 5, 2025
The Royal Law Firm attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal on behalf of our client. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on disability. Royal attorneys argued that Complainant had failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, and that Complainant had engaged in misconduct warranting her termination. Royal attorneys further argued that Complainant did not demonstrate that she suffered from a disability, and that she could not perform the essential functions of her position. The EEOC agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client.
December 13, 2024
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination for their small local client. The Complainants alleged discrimination on the basis of race and color. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainants contacted Respondent for an estimate for services to be performed; Respondent later turned down the work due to lack of time, not race or color, and offered to perform the work the following season. The MCAD agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client due to a lack of probable cause.
Significant Cases
September 24, 2025
The Royal Law Firm is proud to announce that we have been ranked in the inaugural Chambers Spotlight Massachusetts Guide, which is a prestigious recognition from the internationally renowned legal research company Chambers and Partners! We are honored to be recognized for our exceptional expertise in Labor & Employment law. This ranking reflects our unwavering commitment to delivering top-tier legal counsel to businesses throughout the Commonwealth and beyond. Only 2% of attorneys are ranked by Chambers. The Royal Law Firm is the only Labor & Employment firm ranked in Springfield, MA. This award highlights small and mid-sized firms with a proven record of excellence and partner-level attention to client matters. Chambers Spotlight is a new guide designed to showcase the very best boutique and mid-sized firms across key U.S. legal markets, focusing on firms that combine regional insight, national impact, and client-focused service. About The Royal Law Firm The Royal Law Firm is a New England-based, women-owned law firm that exclusively represents businesses. Our attorneys are known for their aggressive litigation strategy, proactive employment law counseling, and commitment to understanding every client’s unique business model and goals. We are proud to be certified as a Women-Owned Business through state and national organizations including WBENC, NAMWOLF, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Supplier Diversity Office. The Royal Law Firm was founded by Amy Royal in 2008 with a mission to promote diversity in the legal field, serve businesses exclusively, and give back to her hometown community. As a seasoned trial lawyer with over 25 years of civil litigation experience representing companies, Amy specializes in employer-side employment law, business tort defense, labor law, and corporate transactions. She has successfully defended clients in individual and class action cases involving wage and hour issues, discrimination, harassment, FMLA, OSHA, ERISA, and more. Amy also advises on union matters, HR policies, workplace investigations, and affirmative action compliance. Her commercial litigation work spans business torts, unfair competition, and contract disputes, while her transactional practice includes drafting employment agreements, vendor contracts, and regulatory compliance strategies. Our recognition in the Chambers Spotlight Guide reflects the dedication and excellence of our entire team. Thank you to our clients, peers, and community for your continued trust and support. We look forward to continuing to serve you with excellence.
August 18, 2025
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on race, color and mental disability. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and complainant could not prove that they experienced an adverse employment action. The CHRO agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client due to a lack of reasonable cause.
June 18, 2025
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on race, color and sex. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant was not subjected to any adverse employment action and thus could not establish a prima facie cause of discrimination. Royal attorneys also argued that Complainant’s allegations of a hostile work environment and harassment fell short. The Complainant was performing her jobs duties in such a way that it was putting the employer at risk. Complainant’s direct supervisor devised a plan to mitigate the risk the employer was facing and help Complainant improve the quality of her work going forward. It was not disciplinary action, and Complainant was considered an employee in good standing at the time she filled her allegations of discrimination. CHRO agreed that there was insufficient proof to sustain a discrimination or hostile work environment claim and that “if anything, it revealed a disagreement in management styles that does not amount to discrimination and/or harassment under Connecticut law,” and dismissed the case against our client.
March 24, 2025
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination for their client. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on race, color, and retaliation. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and complainant could not prove that they experienced an adverse employment action. The MCAD agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client due to a lack of probable cause.
March 5, 2025
The Royal Law Firm attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal on behalf of our client. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on disability. Royal attorneys argued that Complainant had failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, and that Complainant had engaged in misconduct warranting her termination. Royal attorneys further argued that Complainant did not demonstrate that she suffered from a disability, and that she could not perform the essential functions of her position. The EEOC agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client.
December 13, 2024
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination for their small local client. The Complainants alleged discrimination on the basis of race and color. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainants contacted Respondent for an estimate for services to be performed; Respondent later turned down the work due to lack of time, not race or color, and offered to perform the work the following season. The MCAD agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client due to a lack of probable cause.
November 11, 2024
Royal attorneys successfully obtained summary judgment for a large corporation in Hampden Superior Court. Plaintiff claimed a violation of the Massachusetts Wage Act and breach of good faith and fair dealing in relation to a bonus that Plaintiff alleged was owed to him. Defendants had a policy in place that made this bonus completely discretionary and only owed if the Plaintiff stayed with the Defendants through a certain date. Discretionary bonuses are outside the purview of the Massachusetts Wage Act. Defendants argued these points and the Hampden Superior Court ruled that this discretionary bonus was not under purview of the Massachusetts Wage Act and not payable to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, dismissing all counts in favor of the Defendants.
October 24, 2024
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights in a case against our client. The Complainant alleged discrimination based on disability. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant does not have a disability as defined by the relevant statutes and regulations, and that Complainant was terminated for legitimate business reasons. The RICHR agreed with our argument and dismissed the case against our client making a determination of no probable cause.
April 17, 2024
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal on behalf of individually named Defendants at a large not-for-profit corporation in a federal court case. Plaintiff alleged wrongful termination, harassment in the workplace, and retaliation. The court agreed with our arguments that Plaintiff’s Title VII claims against individual Defendants failed to state a claim, and that the Plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. Therefore, the case was fully dismissed in favor of our clients.
March 6, 2024
Royal attorneys successfully obtained a dismissal at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) in a case against our client, a large not-for-profit organization. Royal attorneys argued that the Complainant's complaint failed to establish a prima facie case of whistleblower retaliation and that it should be dismissed in its entirety. The MCAD agreed with our argument, and dismissed the case against our client.