AV Preeminent
Best Law Firms
Best Lawyers
NELA
Super Lawyers

Our Attorneys

Peter Thompson Picture of Peter Thompson

For over 20 years, Attorney Thompson has fought to protect the rights of employees. Peter is "AV Preeminent" rated by Martindale-Hubbell©, a well-respected peer review organization that rates lawyers based on input from judges and other well-respected members of the legal community. He has also been designated a New England "Super Lawyer"© from 2007 to the present and is listed in U.S. News "Best Lawyers in America"© directory, the oldest and most highly-respected peer review guide in the legal profession worldwide.

Peter has successfully litigated several nationally-reported cases including Arnold v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 136 F.3d 854 (1st Cir. 1998), Duckworth v. Pratt & Whitney, Inc., 152 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1998), and Hall v. Maine Municipal Employees Health Trust, 93 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D. Me. 2000).

AV Preeminent badge Best Lawyers Super Lawyers badge Super Lawyers badge

Member: Million Dollar Advocates Forum

New England "Super Lawyer" 2007-present

Education

J.D., University of Maine School of Law
Managing Editor, Maine Law Review

B.A., Bowdoin College

Professional & Bar Association Memberships
  • Association of Trial Lawyers of America
  • New Hampshire Bar Association
  • National Employment Lawyers Association
Published Cases
  • Duckworth v. Pratt & Whitney, Inc., 152 F. 3d 1 (1st Cir. 1998) (lower court ruling granting Defendant's MSJ reversed).
  • Arnold v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 136 F. 3d 854 (1st Cir. 1998) (lower court ruling granting Defendant's MSJ reversed).
  • Hall v. Maine Mun. Employees Health Trust, 93 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D. Maine, 2000) (Defendant’s Motion to Remand denied).
  • Lafortune v. Fiber Materials, Inc., D. Maine, 2004 (Defendant's MSJ denied).
  • Phair v. New Page Corp., 708 F. Supp. 2d 57 (D. Maine, 2010) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
  • Donahue v. Clair Car Connection, Inc., 736 F. Supp. 2d 294 (D. Maine, 2010) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
  • Duckworth v. Mid-State Machine Products, 736 F. Supp. 2d 278 (D. Maine, 2010) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
  • Jewell v. Lincare, Inc., 810 F. Supp. 2d 340 (D. Maine, 2011) (Defendant's Motion to Dismiss denied).
  • Blanco v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 802 F. Supp. 2d 215 (D. Maine, 2011) (Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss denied).
  • Manske v. UPS Cartage Services, Inc., 870 F. Supp. 2d 185 (D. Maine, 2012) (Defendant’s MSJ denied).
  • Stark v. Hartt Transp. Systems, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 3d 445 (D. Me. 2014) (Defendant's MSJ denied).

Chad HansenPicture of Chad Hansen

Chad represents employees in all manner of employee rights litigation including disability discrimination, age discrimination, religious discrimination, sex discrimination, whistleblower retaliation, sexual harassment, medical leave violations, and failure to accommodate claims. He has both first chaired and second chaired employee rights cases to successful verdicts. Chad is AV-Preeminent rated by Martindale-Hubbell. "AV Preeminent" is the organization's highest possible rating for legal skills and trustworthiness and is based on reviews from esteemed members of the legal community and judges. Chad is also listed in U.S. News "Best Lawyers in America"© directory (Employment Law - Individuals), the oldest and most highly-respected peer review guide in the legal profession.

After graduating from the University of Colorado School of Law, Chad worked for the National Organization for Women (“NOW”) National Judicial Education Program which educates the judiciary with regard to victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. Chad worked for three years as a staff attorney for the Maine Disability Rights Center where he focused on disability discrimination in employment, public accommodation, and education and has worked for the Employee Rights Group for the past ten years. Chad is a member of the firm.

AV Preeminent badge Best Lawyers Best Law Firms badge Super Lawyers badge

Chad is a Member and Immediate Past President of the Board of Directors of the Disability Rights Maine.

Education

J.D., University of Colorado School of Law

B.A., Luther College

Reported and Notable Cases
  • Bell v. O'Reilly Auto Parts, 972 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2020) (successful appeal in disability discrimination case where court ordered new trial due to error in jury instructions)
  • Mullen v. New Balance Athletics, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-194-NT, 2019 WL 958370 (D. Me. 2019) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Morin v. Hannaford Bros. Co., LLC, No. 1:17-CV-50-GZS, 2018 WL 2746570 (D. Me. 2018) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Pennington v. Hannaford Bros. Co., LLC, No. 2:17-CV-00053-JDL, 2018 WL 2746577 (D. Me. 2018) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Bell v. O'Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-00501-JDL, 2018 WL 1886491 (D. Me. 2018) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Gagnon v Woodlands Senior Living of Brewer, LLC, No. BCD - CV - 15 - 29, 2015 WL 12851372 (Me.B.C.D. 2017) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Dorr v. Woodlands Senior Living or Brewer, LLC, No. 1:15-CV-00092-JCN, 2017 WL 4329765 (D. Me. Sept. 29, 2017) (Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys Fees and Costs)
  • Prescott v. Rumford Hosp., No. 2:13-CV-00460-JDL, 2016 WL 3406079 (D. Me. June 17, 2016) (Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs)
  • LaFlamme v. Rumford Hosp., No. 2:13-CV-460-JDL, 2015 WL 4139478 (D. Me. 2015) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Crosby v. F.W. Webb, Co., No. 2:12-CV-135-NT, 2014 WL 1268691 (D. Me. 2014) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Stark v. Hartt Transp. Systems, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 3d 445 (D. Me. 2014) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Manfield v Alutiiq Intern. Solutions, Inc., 851 F.Supp.2d 196 (D. Me. 2012) (Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Denied)
  • Manske v. UPS Cartage Services, Inc., 789 F.Supp.2d 213 (D.Me. 2011) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Blanco v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 802 F. Supp.2d 215 (D.Me. 2011) (Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Denied)
  • Phair v. New Page Corp., 708 F.Supp.2d 57 (D.Me. 2010) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Exclude Expert Witness denied)
  • Duckworth v. Mid-State Machine Products, 703 F.Supp.2d 35 (D.Me. 2010) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Rhoades v. Camden Nat. Corp., 575 F.Supp.2d 260 (D.Me. 2008) (Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied)
  • Warren v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 495 F.Supp.2d 86 (D.Me. 2007) (Order on Post Trial Motions granting damages)