1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Ellen Moran Dwyer

Ellen Moran Dwyer

Partner | She/Her/Hers
Partner | She/Her/Hers
ZWR3eWVyQGNyb3dlbGwuY29t
VCardLinkedIn
VCardLinkedIn

Areas of Focus

Overview

Corporate boards and client leaders trust Ellen to advise them in their most sensitive employment matters that generate significant risk for their organizations. Whether leading a high-profile sexual harassment investigation, litigating racial or gender equity issues, responding to activist shareholder demands, or advising on the myriad issues that impact her clients’ most productive talent, Ellen serves as a strategist and collaborative partner to her clients.

Ellen is a trusted advisor to clients across a range of industries, including technology, higher education, and professional services. Clients count on her judgment - based on her more than 30 years of experience counseling and litigating employment matters - in handling and resolving their most sensitive employment matters.  She appreciates the importance of listening, gaining an intimate understanding of her clients’ businesses, and developing holistic and creative solutions that align with their business objectives.  

Ellen’s substantive work extends to counseling clients across the full array of employment statutes and common law, including the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Family Medical Leave Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, among others. She litigates actions filed under federal and state anti-discrimination, retaliation, trade secret and related employment laws, and has extensive experience investigating Board-level issues, including sexual harassment, race and gender equity issues, code of conduct and conflict of interest issues.  

Ellen has been a champion of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at the firm and within the broader legal industry as chair of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity. 

Ellen has served in several senior leadership positions with Crowell, including as chair of the firm’s Executive Committee and a member of its Management Board.

Career & Education

    • St. Lawrence University, B.A., summa cum laude, 1982
    • Cornell Law School, J.D., cum laude, 1985
    • St. Lawrence University, B.A., summa cum laude, 1982
    • Cornell Law School, J.D., cum laude, 1985

    • District of Columbia
    • Massachusetts (Inactive)
    • District of Columbia
    • Massachusetts (Inactive)

Ellen's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Sixth Circuit’s “Background Circumstances” Requirement For “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the "background circumstances" rule that would require majority-group plaintiffs to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII discrimination cases. The decision vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the Sixth Circuit. In so doing, the Court held that all plaintiffs – whether minority or majority employees – bringing discrimination cases under Title VII are subject to the same evidentiary standards under the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating disparate-treatment claims....

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Sixth Circuit’s “Background Circumstances” Requirement For “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

Speaking Engagement | 05.13.25

"Government Contracting Headlines under the New Administration," OOPS 2025: Government Contractors Reacting and Adapting to the New Administration, Tyson's Corner, VA.

Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.29.25

President Trump Issues Executive Order Deprioritizing Disparate Impact Theory of Discrimination

Client Alert | 5 min read | 02.24.25

Administration’s DEI Rollback Efforts Paused by Federal Judge

View All Insights

Practices

Industries

Ellen's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Sixth Circuit’s “Background Circumstances” Requirement For “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the "background circumstances" rule that would require majority-group plaintiffs to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII discrimination cases. The decision vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the Sixth Circuit. In so doing, the Court held that all plaintiffs – whether minority or majority employees – bringing discrimination cases under Title VII are subject to the same evidentiary standards under the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating disparate-treatment claims....

View All Insights