1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Ellen Moran Dwyer

Ellen Moran Dwyer

Partner | She/Her/Hers

Overview

Corporate boards and client leaders trust Ellen to advise them in their most sensitive employment matters that generate significant risk for their organizations. Whether leading a high-profile sexual harassment investigation, litigating racial or gender equity issues, responding to activist shareholder demands, or advising on the myriad issues that impact her clients’ most productive talent, Ellen serves as a strategist and collaborative partner to her clients.

Ellen is a trusted advisor to clients across a range of industries, including technology, professional services, higher education, and professional services. Clients count on her judgment - based on her more than 30 years of experience counseling and litigating employment matters - in handling and resolving their most sensitive employment matters.  She appreciates the importance of listening, gaining an intimate understanding of her clients’ businesses, and developing holistic and creative solutions that align with their business objectives.  

Ellen’s substantive work extends to counseling clients across the full array of employment statutes and common law, including the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Family Medical Leave Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, among others. She litigates actions filed under federal and state anti-discrimination, retaliation, trade secret and related employment laws, and has extensive experience investigating Board-level issues, including sexual harassment, race and gender equity issues, code of conduct and conflict of interest issues.  

Ellen has been a champion of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at the firm and within the broader legal industry as chair of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity. 

Ellen has served in several senior leadership positions with Crowell, including as chair of the firm’s Executive Committee and a member of its Management Board.

Career & Education

|
    • St. Lawrence University, B.A., summa cum laude, 1982
    • Cornell Law School, J.D., cum laude, 1985
    • St. Lawrence University, B.A., summa cum laude, 1982
    • Cornell Law School, J.D., cum laude, 1985
    • District of Columbia
    • Massachusetts (Inactive)
    • District of Columbia
    • Massachusetts (Inactive)

Ellen's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.20.24

Nuziard v. Minority Business Development Agency: Another Blow To Federally Sponsored Affirmative Action Efforts

On March 5, 2024, a federal judge in Texas struck down a federally-sponsored racial preference extended to minority groups seeking to access capital and government contracts. Nuziard v. Minority Business Development Agency (“Nuziard”). Plaintiffs, who are non-minority business owners, challenged a preference provided by the Minority Business Development Agency (“MBDA”), a bureau of the Department of Commerce, to “socially or economically disadvantaged individual[s],” defined to include African Americans, Hasidic Jews, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans and Pacific Islanders. The court struck down the MBDA’s presumption that such racial minorities are socially disadvantaged, finding the preference violated the Equal Protection Clause.   Nuziard, like the recent decision by a federal court in Tennessee in Ultima Services Corp. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture (“Ultima”), follows the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Pres & Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023) (“SFFA”) and, like Ultima, advances the mission of activist organizations across the country seeking to invalidate race-based presumptions in federally funded and sponsored entitlement programs.  ...

|

Ellen's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.20.24

Nuziard v. Minority Business Development Agency: Another Blow To Federally Sponsored Affirmative Action Efforts

On March 5, 2024, a federal judge in Texas struck down a federally-sponsored racial preference extended to minority groups seeking to access capital and government contracts. Nuziard v. Minority Business Development Agency (“Nuziard”). Plaintiffs, who are non-minority business owners, challenged a preference provided by the Minority Business Development Agency (“MBDA”), a bureau of the Department of Commerce, to “socially or economically disadvantaged individual[s],” defined to include African Americans, Hasidic Jews, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans and Pacific Islanders. The court struck down the MBDA’s presumption that such racial minorities are socially disadvantaged, finding the preference violated the Equal Protection Clause.   Nuziard, like the recent decision by a federal court in Tennessee in Ultima Services Corp. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture (“Ultima”), follows the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Pres & Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023) (“SFFA”) and, like Ultima, advances the mission of activist organizations across the country seeking to invalidate race-based presumptions in federally funded and sponsored entitlement programs.  ...