Real estate lawyer Karen Zalewski has been on LinkedIn for more than a year and counting, but she’s still one of the most influential people in real estate in the country.
She’s currently in the midst of an appeal of her LinkedIn suspension, but if you don’t know who she is, let’s explain why she’s important.
Zalewski is the CEO of the Real Estate Board of Greater Los Angeles and she has a lot of real estate clients.
In 2016, she led a group of realtors who filed a class-action lawsuit against LinkedIn claiming they were improperly treated by the online company.
Zalewski has worked at several law firms before joining LinkedIn.
In 2013, she was a partner at the law firm of Gibson Dunn, and she was also a partner in the firm of Mayer Brown before that.
She’s also a real estate agent, but that’s not the case with her LinkedIn account.
Instead, it’s her personal LinkedIn profile.
It shows a picture of her daughter, a photo of her cat, and a picture that shows a dog.
That’s the LinkedIn profile picture that most people who have been following her for a long time will recognize.
Zaleski was not a member of the board of directors at the firm where she worked at Mayer Brown, and in fact she wasn’t on the board at all when she joined LinkedIn.
She did not become a board member until a few months after joining.
That was in February of 2017.
That’s when the company was being sued for wrongful termination by three former employees who had sued LinkedIn.
The three plaintiffs were told that they would be terminated in May if they did not get an answer from LinkedIn in two months.
The three plaintiffs filed a complaint in April that the company would be forced to respond to the lawsuit in about six weeks.
But that’s when Zaleski’s LinkedIn account was suspended.
Zalski and the other plaintiffs were not able to get an official response from LinkedIn, and that’s why the company chose to suspend Zalski’s account for about two weeks.
That decision was based on an arbitration award in March.
In the arbitration award, a judge said that the court found that Zalesks’ account was not protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which protects websites from liability for what people post.
The court ruled that the arbitration awarded to the plaintiffs was “unjustified” and that it should be thrown out because it was made without an appeal.
In its ruling, the judge wrote that it was not reasonable to conclude that the plaintiffs were being treated unfairly under Section 3 of the Act, which states that an “electronic communication service provider is not liable for the content of communications transmitted over the Internet.”
Zalskis lawyers have argued that the arbitrator erred by awarding her arbitration award to the arbitration.
However, Zaleskis attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling.
In March, the Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit against Zalsks account for unfair labor practices and discrimination.
In addition, the commission also found that she violated Section 230, which bars a company from retaliating against employees who file complaints against it.
The case is still pending, but Zalesky has decided to fight the FTC and the arbitrators decision.
The FTC is asking a judge to allow her to appeal her suspension.
Zalls lawyers are arguing that the Arbitration award was valid because she was not in the company’s HR department.
She argued that this was not the same as an HR position, and therefore the arbitration decision should not have been made.
The arbitration award is being appealed to the U.S. District Court in Seattle, and if the appeal is successful, Zalsky’s case could go to trial.