Tackling Giants

George McReynolds called Stowell & Friedman in 2005 after the firm’s landmark settlement with Merrill Lynch in a case alleging gender discrimination, which ultimately yielded $250 million on behalf of nearly 900 female financial advisors. 

McReynolds, who was calling about alleged race discrimination, had followed the case. And he said he had one that was even more severe. 

At the time, Suzanne Bish had been working with Mary Stowell and Linda Friedman for about a year, getting some experience on gender discrimination cases. Little did she know, she was about to spend nearly 10 years as class counsel to roughly 1,400 members on this new case—setting a record as well as a new trajectory for her career.

At issue in McReynolds v. Merrill Lynch were networking and account-distribution policies that negatively affected Black financial advisors. Unlike the old days when advisors were out for themselves, big banks were now working in teams. “One person can be a hunter, and another can be a good investor. They’ve done all kinds of internal studies that show one plus one equals three,” Bish says. “But rather than assign brokers to teams, firms say, ‘We can’t force marriages.’ 

“The allegation was that, because Merrill Lynch had a belief that money was white and not green, they assumed that African-American brokers would fail. So they tended to not be able to get on teams,” Bish continues. “The other big practice that was discriminatory was: When a broker leaves, retires or dies, the firm has their book of business. The suit challenged the practice of disproportionately giving those accounts to white brokers.”

The result was that Black advisors were excluded from teams, and not given the high net-worth clients like their white counterparts—nor the commissions or referrals that came with them. Bish’s team filed a complaint based on the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1866. But when they sought class certification, they met a series of denials over several years. 

“Linda and Mary started this firm by tackling giants. I’ve tried to continue that legacy.”

The thing that sticks with Bish is that the class representatives remained resolute. “After one particular ruling, we were dejected. And I was so angry because it was so wrong, and such a miscarriage of justice. But they were gracious and thankful for the advocacy, and said, ‘Well, what’s next? Let’s pick ourselves up,’” she says. “Because of their own experience, sense of responsibility, and inspiration from the Civil Rights Movement, [the clients] weren’t as surprised when justice was delayed. They were more like, ‘OK. We continue. We persevere.’ It was a terrific lesson.”

Relief would eventually come, but from an unlikely source. 

Initial readings of the 2011 U.S. Supreme Court decision Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes were apocalyptic. “It was like, ‘The sky is falling!’ Because it looked like it might be the end of class actions,” Bish says. When she read the ruling, however, a line from Justice Antonin Scalia about glue holding the reasons for discriminatory decisions together gave her hope. So they filed a renewed motion for cert.

“The judge basically said, ‘You guys are crazy. … You’re arguing to certify because of Wal-Mart?’ We said, ‘Yes, sir, your honor. Please.’ He denied it, but recommended that the Seventh Circuit take it up on interlocutory appeal.” 

And that court agreed. A year later, when the trial neared, a settlement offer came. The final result was $160 million—at that time, the largest-ever common fund in a race discrimination settlement.

Though Bish played a prominent role, she says it was a collaborative effort with her colleagues, notably George Robot and Linda Friedman. “Early in the case, I was learning the law as I was doing it,” she says, “but it was so much fun. I was younger, more aggressive, eager, probably sharper, and cruising for a battle in a respectful way. I was working on the side I believed in; it’s nice to feel like your professional life is aligned with your personal beliefs.”

Word got around about her role in the case. Since McReynolds, Bish has helped secure settlements for minority financial advisors at Wells Fargo ($35.5 million), MetLife ($32.5 million), JPMorgan Chase ($19.5 million) and Edward Jones ($34 million). 

“Because of the courage of the McReynolds plaintiffs, people at those firms who experienced similar treatment thought, ‘I want an equitable workforce, too.’ It allowed people to recognize that things could change and to be courageous,” Bish says.

Thanks to the McReynolds case, Bish “learned an enormous amount, and I carry that with me to this day. Linda and Mary started this firm by tackling giants. I’ve tried to continue that legacy.”

The biggest lesson? “The defense often elevates form over substance and procedure over merits, believing it wins when it’s complicated. We win when it’s about the merits; a true, simple story is more compelling. The more you can make something what it truly is—universal and simple—the better.”

Another thing she learned is more personal. 

“I hate to lose, more than anything. It’s devastating to me,” says Bish. “I try to be as perfect as I can because we’re fighting an uphill battle against a well-financed opponent—sometimes trying to create new law to achieve the aims of the civil rights laws. But I hate to lose mostly because I realize that’s somebody else’s life, and I want them to win. I want justice to prevail for my clients.”