The Universal, Unrelenting Advocacy of Douglas Wigdor

Douglas Wigdor’s clients span A-list celebrities to everyday people. He fights for those who have suffered discrimination, harassment and sexual assault – recognizing that for those who have survived those abuses, their devastating effect is universal.

In the last decade, lawsuits surrounding discrimination, abuse and harassment have rocked every sector, from Hollywood to Wall Street – building upon each other as public response allows survivors of abuse to feel supported in coming forward. When it comes to those cases that have left a permanent mark on the collective consciousness, more often than not, Wigdor has been a key player.

In the more than 20 years since he founded his firm, the renowned litigator has taken on giants in the courtroom. He represented 10 women who came forward to say they were sexually harassed or assaulted by now-infamous media mogul Harvey Weinstein. He took on Fox News, representing 20 Fox employees in widely publicized race and gender discrimination claims resulting in roughly $10M in settlements. In the world of sports, he represented a former New York Knicks player in a defamation suit against the NBA and represented former Miami Dolphins Head Coach Brian Flores in a landmark class action suit alleging racial discrimination in the NFL’s hiring and retention of Black head coaches.

Most recently, he represented R&B singer Cassie in a sexual assault and trafficking case against her former boyfriend, hip-hop star Sean “Diddy” Combs. Though the case settled the day after it was filed, Cassie’s claims sent shockwaves through the music industry and opened the dam of allegations against Combs that have surfaced in the last year. 

At the same time, Wigdor has also taken on monolithic corporations in cases where the plaintiffs may not be as immediately well-known. In Wigdor’s first year as a plaintiffs’ attorney – following a couple of years on the defense side at Morgan Lewis – Wigdor represented a 21-year-old Wal-Mart employee named Patrick Brady, who had cerebral palsy. Brady was assigned garbage collection duties when he was supposed to be working in the store’s pharmacy. Brady and Wigdor took the matter to court, resulting in a $7.5M verdict. 

In one of the most notorious sexual assault cases in recent memory, in 2011 Wigdor represented Nafissatou Diallo, a hotel maid who was allegedly sexually assaulted by French politician Dominique Strauss-Kahn while she was at work. Diallo’s story was told in a Netflix documentary series in 2020, "Room 2806: The Accusation."

Tenacious, savvy and prolific, Wigdor’s name has become synonymous with aggressive advocacy. A  member of both the Lawdragon 500 Leading Civil Rights & Plaintiff Lawyers and Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America, Wigdor is a prominent face of the #MeToo legal movement, frequently landing on the front page. The public nature of his work is not something he shies away from. That’s not out of vanity; Wigdor embraces the limelight brought by his high-profile clients as a tool to effect change on a wider scale. To influence the lives of all survivors, from those who have the most to those who have the least.

Because, in this circumstance, they are the same. 

Lawdragon: Now that you are celebrating more than 20 years of advocacy with your firm, how does the firm in its current form compare to what you expected when you and your partner, Ken Thompson, first founded it?

Douglas Wigdor: We are about to start our 22^nd year as a firm. The firm has certainly grown in terms of size and stature over the years and has been fortunate to have some of the most closely watched cases both on legal and factual issues in the employment discrimination and sexual assault space. When I started the firm, I had confidence we would succeed, but at the time it was hard to imagine the place we find ourselves in now.

LD: Did you have any mentors early on that helped you get to where you are now?

DW: Three people stick out. The first was my trial advocacy professor in law school, Lou Barracato. He also taught me evidence, but the trial advocacy course was a year long and had limited students that culminated in a trial before a U.S. District Judge. It was an incredible experience. Professor Barracato had so much insight into trial tactics and evidence that I still use to this day.

The second was James Catterson, the former District Attorney of Suffolk County. My first job out of law school was working as an Assistant District Attorney. Mr. Catterson was certainly a controversial figure in local politics, but he took the time to work with the younger lawyers and encouraged us to try cases and be respectful to judges but not to let them walk over you. Much of what I learned in the courtroom was through my time in the District Attorney’s office. There were others who I worked with that I looked up to, including Ed Flaherty, Judge Randy Hinrichs, Judge Mark Cohen and Judge Glenn Murphy.

Finally, after leaving the DA’s office I clerked for Judge Arthur D. Spatt. That was a transformative experience, learning from such a well-respected and practical judge who treated all litigants fairly and gave them all an opportunity to put their best foot forward on behalf of their clients. Civility in the courtroom was also stressed. I cherish the time I spent with him – including having lunch with him every Saturday to talk about a host of topics from law to politics to Broadway shows!

LD: You mentioned law school, but did any experience from your undergraduate work push you towards a career in the law?

DW: Absolutely. I took a law and society course at Washington University taught by Professor Cummins. It was a small first-year class that delved into the law, and I followed it up with another course by Professor Barker that really was taught like a law school class. I was hooked!

LD: And what was it that first brought you to law?

DW: I always found the law appealing as I enjoyed public speaking and advocacy. I can think of no better way to find the truth than through cross-examination. It is something that I can continue to get better at and requires a ton of preparation, but it is without question the highlight of what I do.

LD: Did you have any jobs between undergrad and law school?

DW: I worked every summer while I was in college, including internships with judges, the SEC, and the U.S. Attorneys’ Office. To be honest, the most rewarding experience though was teaching tennis in Washington, D.C., for three consecutive years as I got to teach people like Alan Greenspan, Andrea Mitchell, senators, congressmen, ambassadors and other dignitaries. All these people would talk to me about their jobs and what they did. While they hopefully learned a bit more about the game of tennis, I took all of their information in!

I can think of no better way to find the truth than through cross-examination.

LD: That must have been fascinating. When it was time to go to law school, why did you choose Catholic University?

DW: To be honest, I didn’t get into most of the law schools I wanted to go to. That was a motivator though for me, as I had a bit of a chip on my shoulder and still do when it comes to that. In the end I was lucky. I got an incredible education at Catholic University’s law school and met some wonderful people. I wouldn’t change a thing.

LD: Looking forward to today, how would you describe your style as a lawyer?

DW: I try to be an objective lawyer and understand the strengths and weaknesses of my case. Part of that was my training at Morgan Lewis and understanding the management/defense side, but intrinsically I think lawyers lose credibility when they don’t acknowledge the valid points of the other side. I do not raise my voice or engage in name calling or finger-pointing. I hope that others see me as someone who is willing to roll up their sleeves and litigate a case fairly and aggressively but within the bounds of our ethical and legal obligations.

LD: You have handled so many widely publicized matters, but is there a matter or client in your career that stands out as a memorable to you?

DW: I get asked this question a lot, but it is really a hard one to answer because each client I have represented stands out for different reasons. If I had to pick one, I would say it was the first civil trial I did as a plaintiffs’ lawyer on behalf of Patrick Brady against Wal-Mart. Patrick was treated unlawfully based on his disability and the trial resulted in a $7.5M verdict. I was able to change the trajectory of his life.

LD: That’s incredible. And, after 20 years, are there any changes on the horizon for the firm?

DW: From a revenue perspective the firm continues to grow as the types of cases we take on are more lucrative. Focusing on fewer but more important cases has been our trend as we don’t want to get bogged down fighting for years on cases that will make little impact in the landscape in which we litigate.

LD: And you’re continuing to manage the firm? Has that role changed at all over the years?

DW: Since the inception of the firm, I have done the vast majority of the firm’s management. To be honest, I prefer to be in the courtroom, but it is difficult to do both. I expect that to change as my partners take on more management of the firm that would enable me to do more of what I enjoy, which is the actual litigation.

LD: What do you believe makes Wigdor stand out as a firm?

DW: I don’t think there is another firm that has a roster of cases that are being so closely watched and are as impactful as ours. We are taking on some of the most well-known celebrities, politicians and business leaders. That obviously means we are going up against high-quality lawyers with unlimited resources. People who work at the firm get an incredible opportunity to work with and against the best at very high stakes. If you actually love the practice of law, I can think of no better place to do it.

LD: Are there any recent achievements you can share with us?

DW: My involvement in the Sean Combs case has been something I am very proud about as it has opened the door to so many other people who have been victimized by people in this industry.

LD: #MeToo, of course, was a watershed moment in which you were a prominent figure. While it swayed public opinion, how have you seen the ramifications of the movement play out in legal proceedings in the years following? 

DW: We are certainly litigating more sexual assault cases that occur out of the workplace, but our fundamental practice is still employment litigation. Unfortunately, I have seen a lot of surprising defense litigation tactics since #MeToo. Some of our adversaries have decided to attack us as lawyers as opposed to litigating the merits of the case. I have always tried to foster positive relationships with our adversaries and agree to disagree on certain issues, but the rise in sanctions motions and actual lawsuits against the firm for obvious and improper reasons has been disheartening to say the least. I presume that is because our adversaries are trying to appease their clients and increase their own revenues, but the best lawyers, and the ones who I respect, would not permit their clients to dictate litigation tactics that cross the line.

People who work at the firm get an incredible opportunity to work with and against the best at very high stakes.

LD: What do you do for fun when you’re outside the office?

DW: Fun for me typically involves sports. I play a lot of tennis and golf and run and hit the gym. I have a small group of friends in Forest Hills where we live, and I enjoy spending time with them and of course my wife and two children, and my dog Ranger – a Cavapoo.

LD: If you hadn’t decided to become a lawyer, what career do you think you’d have now?

DW: That is a hard question to answer as I have been focused on the law for so long. I love to teach so I would say that I would have gone into academia.

LD: Finally, do you have a favorite book or movie about the justice system?

DW: I loved the movie and series “The Paper Chase” about Harvard Law School.