Michael V. Galo Jr. dedicates his practice to all areas of federal and state employment and labor law. Mr. Galo has a particular interest in issues relating to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. He also has extensive experience representing management in matters relating to the National Labor Relations Act, including union-organizing campaigns, collective bargaining and union arbitrations.
Over the last twenty five years, Mr. Galo has handled numerous cases and matters involving non-competition agreements, covenants of confidentiality, and the protection of trade secrets under both state and federal law.
Mr. Galo has significant jury trial experience, having tried a number of employment discrimination and retaliation cases to verdict in state and federal court. Mr. Galo also maintains an active appellate practice, having served as lead counsel in 16 employment cases before the U.S. and Texas Courts of Appeals. Nine of these cases have proceeded to oral argument.
Representative Cases: Kanida v. Nursefinders, 363 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 2004) (affirming jury verdict for employer and holding that district court did not commit reversible error in instructing the jury); Pineda v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 360 F.3d 483 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding that heightened “pretext plus” standard applies to cases under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act); Qualls v. Lack’s Stores, Inc., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5731 (N.D. Tex. 1999) (early ADA case holding that employee with Hepatitis C was not substantially limited in any major life activity), aff’d, 210 F.3d 369 (5th Cir. 2000); Rodriguez v. Roadway Express, Inc., 1997 WL 839014 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 1997) (summary judgment for the employer in early ADA “reasonable accommodation” case and holding that the employee broke off “interactive process”), aff’d, 199 F.3d 437 (5th Cir. 1999); and Rook v. Xerox Corp., 55 Fed. Appx. 716 (5th Cir. 2002) (affirming summary judgment for employer in ADA/FMLA case and finding no evidence that employee had been terminated, and also that the district court did not err in abbreviating discovery); Chavarria v. Despachos Del Norte, Inc., 2005 WL 1515472 (S.D. Tex, Jun. 22, 2005) (dismissing plaintiffs’ age discrimination claims resulting from reduction in force); Seidler v. United Parcel Service, 2005 WL 831839 (W.D. Tex. 2005) (dismissing Plaintiff’s case for negligence, conversion, and violations of DTPA based upon preemption under the Airline De-Regulation Act); Susan Esquivel et al v. Hillcoat Properties, 484 F.Supp.2d 582 (W.D. Tex. 2007) (holding that fact issues existed regarding whether realtors may be employees for purposes of FLSA); Lee v. Waste Management, 2008 WL 246374 (S.D. Tex. 2008) (transferring ADA case to Western District of Texas based upon convenience of the parties); Gonzales v. Texas Health & Human Service Comm’n, 2014 WL 6606629 (W.D. Texas 2014) (deny State of Texas’ Motion for Summary Judgment in ADA/failure to provide reasonable accommodation case); Keen v. DXP Enterprises, 2016 WL 3253895 (W.D. Tex. 2016) (granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment in FLSA overtime case and finding that old field worker was not exempt from overtime provisions of the law); Cisneros v. Phpm Mission Care Centers, 2017 WL 1907766 (W.D. Tex. 2017) (Denying Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on Plaintiff’s FMLA claims); DeLao v. VT San Antonio Aerospace, Inc., 2018 WL 3603067 (W.D. Tex. 2018) (granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s FMLA claims); Ellis v. Viking Enterprises, Inc., 2019 WL 6271784 (W.D. Tex. 2019)(bench trial finding that Plaintiffs were not exempt from overtime provision of the FLSA and awarding them back pay, liquidated damages, and attorney fees); Olan v. Uvalde ISD, 2021 WL 4155253 (W.D. Tex. 2021) (denying Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on client’s ADA and FMLA claims); Bruce v. Old England’s Lion & Rose Rim, LLC, 2021 WL 4953910 (W.D. Tex. 2021) (denying summary judgment to the employer in case under Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act); Sharpe v. Charter Communications, LLC, Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-00188(DAE), Oct. 12, 2021 (denying Defendant employer’s Motion for Summary Judgment in ADA case involving failure to provide reasonable accommodation).
Mr. Galo also is a regular speaker at human resources and continuing legal education seminars.
Mr. Galo is from Laredo, Texas, where much of his family still resides. He is fluent in Spanish and maintains an active practice throughout Central and South Texas. Mr. Galo is married to Blanca Pellegrin Galo, and they have one son.