FOLLOW US

A contentious whistleblower lawsuit brought by an attorney against her former law firm, Matthiesen Wickert & Lehrer SC, is headed back to state court after a federal judge ruled that the case fails to meet the $75,000 threshold required for federal jurisdiction.

U.S. District Judge Marcia Morales Howard issued the decision Tuesday, finding the actual damages alleged by plaintiff Laura J. Rodgers — who once served as managing partner of the firm’s Jacksonville office — fall between $55,000 and $60,000, far below the bar to remain in federal court.

“Defendant has failed to meet its burden in establishing the amount in controversy,” Judge Howard wrote. “This action will be remanded to state court.”

Whistleblower Accusations Rooted in Legal Ethics

Rodgers alleges she was forced out of the firm to avoid endangering her law license after she raised red flags about a paralegal allegedly engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. According to her April complaint, filed in Florida's Fourth Judicial Circuit Court, the paralegal routinely advised clients, negotiated settlements, drafted legal complaints, and referred out cases — all without a license.

Rodgers began her tenure with the firm in July 2023 and claims that after raising concerns, she faced pressure that made it untenable to continue her employment, thus constituting retaliation in violation of Florida's Whistleblower Act.

The Tug-of-War Over Jurisdiction

The firm, headquartered in Wisconsin, removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, citing diversity jurisdiction and arguing that Rodgers’ damages — including employee benefits, lost wages, and severance demands — exceeded the $75,000 federal threshold.

But Judge Howard rejected that argument, noting that pre-suit demand letters, including one requesting $86,250 in severance, do not alone establish the actual damages at the time of removal. One of Rodgers’ letters was sent after she found new employment, which the judge said mitigated her financial damages.

An April 2025 demand letter pegged Rodgers’ losses at $60,000, a figure the judge found to be a “reasonable estimate” supported by the record.

Mixed Outcome on Fees

Although the court sided with Rodgers on the jurisdictional issue, it declined to award attorney fees associated with the removal and remand process. Judge Howard acknowledged that Matthiesen Wickert had a “reasonable basis” for trying to move the case to federal court, even if the effort ultimately failed.

Attorneys Respond

Rodgers is represented by Arthur Schofield of Arthur Schofield PA, who praised the decision, stating the court "made the correct ruling" by respecting state jurisdiction.

Meanwhile, Lloyd R. Schwed, counsel for Matthiesen Wickert, stated that the firm remains confident Rodgers’ claims are without merit and will move to dismiss the case in state court.

What’s Next

As the case now heads back to state court, all eyes are on whether the Florida judiciary will view Rodgers’ claims — centered on alleged ethical violations and retaliation — as a whistleblower violation or a miscommunication gone litigious.

Either way, the lawsuit draws a spotlight on a rarely litigated but serious concern in the legal industry: the boundary between paralegal support and unauthorized legal practice — and the consequences when those lines get blurred.