Michael N. LaVelle

Attorney in Bridgeport, CT
Michael N. LaVelle practices in the areas of labor and employment law including employment discrimination, labor board and other administrative agency practice and wrongful discharge litigation, and municipal law.

Mick has broad trial experience, both jury and non-jury, before state and federal civil courts and before administrative agencies that regulate employment. He successfully litigated the case of Bridgeport Hospital v. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, et al., 232 Conn. 91 (1995), in which the Connecticut Supreme Court curtailed the commission's ability to award damages against employers. He serves as a special master for the U.S. District Court.

He is experienced in both the private and public sector in collective bargaining negotiations and contract drafting, labor contract administration and trials of grievance arbitration, and preparation of employment guidelines, employee handbooks and manuals. He advises clients on general personnel administration, executive terminations and wage and hour policies. He has written and spoken on a variety of employment-related issues for local and national audiences. Mick has also served as a town attorney for many years, including representation in numerous zoning and other land use appeals.

Community Involvement
Homes for the Brave - chairman, board of directors; organization that provides support and resources for homeless veterans
The Kennedy Center - board of directors

Honors & Awards
Listed in Chambers USA, America's Leading Lawyers to Businesses in the area of labor and employment
Received the highest peer review rating by Martindale-Hubbell (AV)

News & Events
SEMINAR: New Developments in Labor & Employment Law - Hartford

Publications & Alerts
CT Law of the Land: Week of January 5
CT Law of the Land: Week of September 30
CT Law of the Land: Week of September 29
CT Law of the Land: Week of September 17
Agency Tries to Dodge Restrictions on Awards: CHRO Wants to Offer Emotional Distress Compensation in Discrimination Cases

Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 5.0 of 5

Areas of Law

  • Labor
  • Employment Law and Employee Benefits
  • Labor and Employment Counseling
  • Training and Litigation
  • Union Issues
  • Health Care
  • Hospitals and Health Care Institutions
  • Physicians and Other Health Care Practitioners
  • Municipal Law
  • Town Governments
  • Departments and Authorities
  • Land Use


Peer Rating


Overall Peer Rating

5.0 out of 5.0
  • Meets very high criteria of general ethical standards
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.

Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 1975, Connecticut
1981, Massachusetts
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut
U.S. Supreme Court

Law School Attended

Boston University
Class of 1975

University Attended

Harvard College
Class of 1968
cum laude

Associations & Memberships

Professional Affiliations

Connecticut Association of Municipal Attorneys - officer and director

Representative Cases

Representative Experience; Extensive trial work before employment regulating agencies such as EEOC, Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, Workers Compensation Commission, state and federal Departments of Labor, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and National Labor Relations Board; Argued cases before state and federa... More

Community Contributions

Contact Information






Send email to Michael N. LaVelle

Office Information
Michael N. LaVelle
 850 Main Street, P.O. Box 7006,
Bridgeport, CT 06601-7006


Pullman & Comley, LLC (Bridgeport, Connecticut)

About Client Rating
About Peer Rating

Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

Determining a Rating

The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

  • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
  • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
  • 1-2.9 Rated

Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

The Reviewers

Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.


Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

Martindale-Hubbell's role

Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.