Full article

Law firms around the world hold their breath as a lawyer files a $67 million age-discrimination claim

Attorney Stewart B. Herman, 62, sues Katten Muchin Rosenman

The few precedents that exist on this issue ended in out-of-court settlements; however, Stewart intends to take his case all the way to the end.”

During recent years, the global legal profession has made major efforts to implement policies on diversity, inclusion and professional wellbeing. However, one form of discrimination remains silent, persistent and rarely reported: age discrimination inside law firms. It is a deeply rooted phenomenon that affects even the most prestigious firms in the world, and which has now erupted into the open thanks to one of the most high-profile cases of the year.
Age has become the last taboo in law firms, a discrimination tacitly accepted and normalized by internal structures obsessed with hyper-productivity, immediate profitability and the cult of youth. The following case demonstrates this with clarity.

The Katten Muchin Rosenman scandal: the case that opened Pandora’s box

The lawsuit was filed by Stewart B. Herman, a former partner at Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, one of the most influential law firms in the United States, headquartered in Chicago and with a dominant presence in New York, the city where Herman developed nearly his entire professional career. In April 2025, Herman sued the firm for age discrimination, claiming $67 million for his termination, which he argues occurred solely because he was 62 years old. Herman asserts that the firm dismantled his aviation finance practice, removed his access to clients, marginalized him from internal decision-making, left him without resources, and ultimately dismissed him while he was managing deals worth over $100 million. According to the complaint, senior executives at Katten argued that “lawyers over 60 pose a greater malpractice risk,” a statement Herman considers baseless and discriminatory. He also states that the firm strategically pushed him out before his annual pension valued at more than $140,000 could fully vest.
Katten described the lawsuit as “meritless and desperate,” but the reputational damage is already done: the case has reignited the global debate on age discrimination in law firms.

Age discrimination: the last taboo of the legal profession

Despite advances in diversity policies, age remains the least addressed bias within the profession. It is common for firms to pressure senior partners to retire,
reduce their workload to force them out, avoid promoting older lawyers,
replace experience with cheaper young talent, and even eliminate entire departments composed mostly of senior attorneys. Thus, the traditional pyramid model already harsh by design becomes even more aggressive when the firm seeks to maximize short term profit. The paradox is clear: the very profiles most often pushed aside are the ones who bring the most structural value to the firm client networks, market intelligence, doctrinal authority, and strategic capability.

A growing legal risk for firms

Age discrimination is not only an ethical problem: it is a real legal threat.

United States Protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
Any adverse treatment of someone over 40 can lead to multimillion-dollar awards.

United Kingdom: The Equality Act 2010 prohibits dismissals, failed promotions or professional obstacles based on age although in practice it has been far less effective.

European Union: Consistent case law from the Court of Justice of the EU reinforces the prohibition of age-based discrimination even in highly qualified professions.

Global law firms must deeply review their internal structures if they do not wish to face lawsuits, sanctions, and irreparable reputational damage.

Why do law firms discriminate based on age?

The factors are usually the same: the obsession with immediate profitability,
the mistaken belief that youth equal efficiency, internal partnership pressure to renew the pyramid, the lack of alternative career models, and a culture that values billable hours over real value. Many senior lawyers cannot or do not want to keep up with extreme workloads, but they bring something no algorithm or junior attorney can replicate judgment, reputation, network, strategy and real-world experience.

Toward a necessary cultural shift in the legal profession

If law firms want to remain sustainable in an increasingly competitive market, they must redefine their relationship with senior talent. The most forward-thinking firms are already working on: hybrid career models, strategic counsel roles, senior mentoring programs, value-based metrics not tied exclusively to billable hours, and explicit anti-age-discrimination policies. The legal profession must recover something essential: experience is not a cost experience is an asset.

Conclusion

The legal profession can no longer hide age discrimination

The case of the veteran partner against the law firm Katten has exposed a reality the profession has tried to conceal for decades: age discrimination is a real, structural and global problem. Now, with a $67 million claim on the table and the international media spotlight focused on the legal industry, this lawsuit could lead to a historic ruling one capable of shaking the foundations of major global law firms.