Joe leads O’Neil Cannon, Hollman, DeJong & Laing’s Employment Law Practice Group and has extensive experience representing management in a vast array of employment and labor matters. He is licensed to practice law in the states of Illinois and Wisconsin and has represented clients in litigation matters in both state and federal courts, including the federal district courts in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin.

Joe has significant experience as a seasoned litigator having tried cases to juries in both federal and state courts achieving resounding success for his clients. He has also represented the interests of his clients in other parts of the country, including Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, New York, and Utah.

Joe Assists Clients With

• Employment Discrimination Litigation
• Non-Competition and Trade Secret Litigation
• Appellate Matters before the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the Appellate Court of Illinois, and the Wisconsin Court of Appeals
• Occupational Safety and Health Matters
• Wage and Hour Issues
• NLRB and Unfair Labor Practice Matters
• Union Grievance and Arbitration Proceedings
• Employment Policy Drafting and Review
• Proper Employment Practices to Avoid Litigation 

Examples of Joe’s Recent Client Work

• Successfully defended a Minnesota employer on a Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed in U.S. District Court based upon a claim of trade secrets misappropriations under Wis. Stat. § .
• Successfully defended an Illinois employer at trial and again at the Court of Appeals against a $400,000 claim of tortious interference with prospective economic advantage based upon the allegation that the employer attempted to enforce an unenforceable non-competition agreement
• Successfully defended a Wisconsin employer before the Department of Workforce Development, Circuit Court of Sauk County, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Court of Appeals against an employee who engaged in a campaign of vexatious litigation which resulted, ultimately, in a money judgment being entered against the employee
• Successfully reversed a decision by an administrative law judge awarding an employee $191,649 in damages on a retaliation claim and successfully defended the reversal of the judgment in the Utah Court of Appeals. See Carter v. Labor Commission Appeals Board, 2006 UT App 477 (Utah Ct. App. 2006)
• Successfully obtained permanent injunctive relief in Cook County Circuit Court for an employer harassed and threatened by a Chicago area local union conducting mass protests on the employer’s property
• Successfully defended an employer in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in a jury trial by convincing the court to dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 50, a motion after verdict, on the grounds that the plaintiff did not meet her burden of proof in establishing a case of sex discrimination.  See Hossack v. Floor Covering Associates of Joliet, 2004 WL 2423825 (N.D. Ill. 2004)
• Successfully obtained summary judgment for an Illinois employer in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against an employee alleging that her assignment to a temporary light duty position, as a reasonable accommodation, entitled her to a permanent job position.  See Ulatowski v. John Sterling Corp., 2004 WL 1385829 (N.D. Ill. 2004)
• Succesfully obtained permanent injunctive relief in Cook County Circuit Court for an employer harassed and threatened by a Chicago area local union conducting mass protests on the employer’s property 
• Argued case of first impression before the Appellate Court of Illinois regarding the retroactive effect of the 1996 amendments to the Illinois Human Rights Bowne of Chicago, Inc. v. Human Rights Commission, 301 116, 703 N.E.2d 443, 234 Ill. Dec. 582 (1st Dist. 1998)
• Successfully defended a major regional airline in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin by obtaining summary judgment against a pilot alleging a claim under the ADA when the airline would not accommodate the pilot’s inability to sit for a specified period of time based upon safety concerns
• Substantially reduced OSHA penalties and eliminated all willful violations for a Kentucky employer cited for violations of OSHA’s lockout/tagout standard where an employee had received life threatening injuries following an explosion of a plastic injection molding machine
• Substantially reduced OSHA penalties and eliminated all willful violations for an Ohio employer cited for various violations related to the death of an employee crushed by a forklift

 Court Admissions

• Wisconsin
• Illinois
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
• U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
• U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
• U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Trial Bar)
• U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois
•  U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
• U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
• U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan