Washington, D.C.—Local photographer Charlotte Richardson today filed a countersuit against her former employer of thirty-five years, Central Photo, alleging that the company discriminated against her due to her disability of cancer and age when it summarily terminated her on July 28, 2025. According to the countersuit, Central Photo began harassing Ms. Richardson based on her disability shortly after she revealed she had a second bout of cancer and required treatment in the months ahead. The countersuit also alleges that Central Photo retaliated against Ms. Richardson for raising concerns about wage and hour violations under federal and state law and for refusing to sign a non-compete that she believed was unlawful under D.C.’s non-complete ban.
“Ms. Richardson’s allegations highlight why discrimination and retaliation in the workplace are so harmful” said Katherine Atkinson, Ms. Richardson’s attorney. “Ms. Richardson was a central pillar of this small company and continued to work diligently and effectively during her cancer treatments. She was devastated to lose her job due to discrimination and retaliation. She is determined to continue her photography career after this unjust termination and despite Central Photo’s attempt to induce Ms. Richardson into a non-compete.”
Ms. Richardson also seeks to dismiss Central Photo’s lawsuit against her, which the company filed shortly after terminating her. Central Photo alleges in its suit that Ms. Richardson breached a non-disclosure agreement, converted its property, and engaged in misappropriation. In her premotion statement to dismiss, Ms. Richardson alleges that Central Photo’s allegations are too vague to state a violation of the law and should be dismissed. Ms. Richardson also emphasizes that some of the information Central Photo claims is “confidential” is in fact publicly known.
Small employers are covered by D.C.’s local anti-discrimination law, the D.C. Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on numerous protected categories, including disability and age. The law also prohibits employers from retaliating against employees for asserting their rights under the Act or opposing discrimination they believe violates the Act. D.C.’s Human Rights Act is more expansive than Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on, among other things, disability and age. Small employers should therefore ensure they are complying with local law, even if they believe they are not covered employers under federal anti-discrimination law.
Since her termination, Ms. Richardson has started her own photography company. She is currently in the final stages of her cancer treatment and committed to meeting the photography needs of those in the Metropolitan Washington area.
Ms. Richardson is represented by Katherine Atkinson of Atkinson Law Group.