Legal Analysis
Employment Tip of the Month – April 2026
April 2026
Michael Colgan represents a broad range of clients, from nationwide corporations to local businesses, in employment and labor law matters at the agency, state, and federal levels. His practice focuses on the defense of claims related to discrimination, retaliation, harassment, defamation, and contract disputes. In addition to advising clients on best practices for employment policies, severance agreements, and contracts, Michael prides himself on helping clients navigate the ever-evolving employment and labor law landscape to achieve their goals through settlement, mediation, arbitration, or litigation.
Before joining Wilson Elser, Michael was a law clerk at a boutique Texas litigation firm, where he gained valuable experience assisting with general litigation and employment disputes. During law school, he served as a judicial intern in the 455th Civil District Court in Travis County, Texas.
Employment & Labor
Michael has successfully handled widely publicized discrimination and harassment cases brought against prominent educational institutions and medical care providers.
Commercial Litigation
In the commercial litigation area, Michael has represented franchisee clients in extensive multi-state litigation regarding breach of warranty, breach of contract, discrimination, and unfair business practices claims.
Nancy V. Wright (Partner-New York, NY), Saige Subick (Of Counsel-New York, NY), and Michael Colgan (Associate-New York, NY) secured a complete victory for our client, a public college under the State University of New York, in New York City. In a hard-fought, multi-witness disciplinary proceeding arbitrated under N.Y. Education Law § 2587 and the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), against the employee’s union. Our client brought this action against an IT analyst, who had been with the client since 2007, who repeatedly refused to perform assigned tasks, engaged in loud and argumentative behavior in the workplace, consistently abused the time and attendance policy, and, most seriously, made a direct threat of gun violence against a supervisor following the denial of a work-from-home request. The team presented extensive evidence and multiple witness testimony demonstrating a pattern of performance deficiencies and support of the gross misconduct and insubordination charges. The team organized five years of performance documentation into an exhibit outlining that the employee had been counseled and submitted a concise, fact-driven 40-page post-hearing summation brief that, among other arguments, showed the threat of violence as per se terminable misconduct, rendering all other charges surplusage. After a four-day evidentiary hearing spread across five months, the Hearing Officer issued a Report & Recommendation that agreed with the Wilson Elser team on virtually all points. The arbitrator found “gross misconduct” and “just cause” for termination under § 2587 and Article 28.28 of the CBA. The Union’s demand for reinstatement with back pay was denied in its entirety.
Nancy V. Wright, Saige A. Subick and Michael Colgan