A 40-year veteran of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has filed a lawsuit claiming she faced harassment and demotion while caring for her dying parents, exposing what her attorney calls a violation of anti-discrimination laws within a government office sworn to uphold justice.
At a Glance
- Joan Davila, who began her career at the Manhattan DA’s Office in 1984, claims she faced discrimination and retaliation while caring for her elderly parents
- Her lawsuit alleges “caretaker discrimination, retaliation and harassment,” including having her health insurance temporarily revoked
- Davila was removed from her position overseeing extraditions after using family leave, then allegedly faced erratic deadlines and denied overtime
- Official complaints to supervisors and higher-ups in the office were allegedly ignored or dismissed
- Neither the DA’s office nor the city’s Law Department has commented on the pending litigation
Decades of Service Met With “Toxic Environment”
Joan Davila began her career at the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office in 1984, starting as a clerk and working her way up to overseeing the extradition office. After nearly four decades of dedicated service, Davila now finds herself at odds with the office she once loved. Her lawsuit details a pattern of alleged discrimination and retaliation that began in 2019 when she first used paid family leave to care for her aging parents, marking the beginning of what she describes as a systematic campaign to push her out.
“There’s no empathy,” Davila said, calling the office she loved for nearly four decades now a “toxic environment.”
The lawsuit represents a stark contrast between the treatment Davila allegedly received and the public image of the Manhattan DA’s Office under the leadership of DA Alvin Bragg. Davila specifically noted in her complaint that such treatment would not have occurred under former DA Robert Morgenthau, suggesting a cultural shift within the office that once valued long-term employees. Neither the DA’s office nor the city’s Law Department has commented on the pending litigation.
Allegations of Systematic Retaliation
Davila’s complaint outlines a series of retaliatory actions that followed her use of family leave. Upon returning from leave in early 2023, she discovered her extradition position had been given to another employee. Although offered a new role, she alleges further retaliation occurred when her father needed care again in 2024. The lawsuit claims that supervisor Siobhan Carty imposed erratic deadlines, denied overtime that had previously been standard, and made unsubstantiated accusations against Davila.
Perhaps most alarming among the allegations is the claim that Davila’s health insurance was abruptly canceled while she was using family leave to care for her parents. She also reports missing two paychecks during this period. When attempting to discuss her deceased father with colleagues, Davila claims she was told to stop mentioning him. These actions constitute what her attorney, John Scola, characterizes as clear violations of anti-discrimination laws.
Failed Attempts to Resolve the Situation Internally
Before filing her lawsuit, Davila attempted to resolve the situation through internal channels. The legal complaint states that meetings with her union representative and the office’s chief operating officer proved unproductive. Her official complaints were allegedly ignored, and higher-ups in the office did not respond to her pleas for assistance. This systematic failure to address her concerns left Davila with little choice but to seek legal redress.
“I was coming back to nothing,” she told The Post. “I was devastated.”
The retaliation allegedly continued to escalate, with Davila being denied work-from-home accommodations that were routinely granted to other employees. She was also reportedly assigned tasks typically reserved for paralegals and analysts, despite her senior position and decades of specialized experience. The lawsuit characterizes these actions as part of a deliberate effort to force her resignation after her use of legally protected family leave.
