Thomas A. Cattel

Mr. Cattel’s practice today involves handling matters as a third party neutral in facilitative mediations and other ADR methodology. In his 37-year career, his practice focused on the representation of corporate clients in employment litigation and counseling of management. Mr. Cattel served as lead trial counsel on hundreds of individual and multiple plaintiff employment cases on behalf of General Motors Corporation, FCA, formerly Chrysler Corporation, DTE Energy Company, Tenet Healthcare Corporation and other corporate clients.

In addition to his employment litigation practice, Mr. Cattel represented private and public sector clients at main table labor negotiations involving the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, United Automobile Workers, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. Mr. Cattel’s labor practice also included representing management in labor arbitrations.

Mr. Cattel also regularly handled internal investigations and oversaw large-scale corporate reorganizations and rightsizing for his clients, counseling them through this potential litigation minefield.

Before joining Ogletree Deakins, Mr. Cattel was one of the founding principals of Cattel, Tuyn & Rudzewicz, a Michigan employment and labor law firm created in 1999, which joined Ogletree Deakins in September 2007. Throughout his legal career Mr. Cattel focused his practice on employment litigation, E&O litigation involving professionals, labor matters, counseling on behalf of employers and commercial litigation. Mr. Cattel serves as a court appointed Case Evaluator in Macomb County Circuit Court and as a mediator/facilitator for private parties in employment litigation.

Significant published legal precedent Mr. Cattel established in Michigan involve an employer’s ability to require employees to file claims within a shortened period of limitations (Clark v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 268 Mich. App.138 ; 706 N.W.2d 471 (2005) ); that the statute of limitations on a hostile environment claim begins to run from when the facts giving rise to the claim occurred and not the termination of employment (Magee v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 472 Mich. 108; 693 N.W.2d 166 (2005)); changes in personnel policies can constitute a subsequent remedial measure precluding admission at trial MRE 407 (Jernigan v. General Motors Corp., 180 Mich. App. 575; 447 N.W.2d 822 (1989).