A former financial advisor with JPMorgan is suing the bank, claiming she was fired when she couldn’t return to work after a breast cancer diagnosis.
Connie Mireles originally filed her suit in March in California state court against J.P. Morgan Securities and its parent company, JPMorgan Chase, though it was moved to federal proceedings last week.
According to Mireles’ complaint, she began working as a bank teller with JPMorgan in 2006, before eventually rising to relationship banker in 2015 and financial advisor in 2020. She registered with the SEC at the end of 2019, according to commission records.
In the complaint, Mireles claims she largely got satisfactory reviews from supervisors, arguing that her 2020 review stated she’d been “diligent and purposeful in building relationships with her branch teams,” and received similar positive marks for the following few years.
However, in 2022, Mireles took medical leave due to “debilitating migraines,” and the following summer was diagnosed with breast cancer. By November 2024, JPMorgan requested “an update on her medical condition,” and asked if she had a return-to-work date.
Mireles claims she told them she had cancer surgery set for December, and could return to work by Jan. 24, 2025. According to the suit, her contacts at JPMorgan responded that if she was not at work on January 27, she’d be fired. According to Mireles, she updated her return-to-work date with a note from her oncologist, giving her a February 5 start date.
“On January 27, 2025, Ms. Mireles called her employer and asked if they would honor the return to work note for February 5, 2025, and they responded that she was fired,” the complaint read. “Although she was assured that she would receive a check in the mail, Ms. Mirles has not been paid her accrued time owed.”
According to Mireles, her cancer diagnosis was “a substantial motivating factor” in the decision to fire her, and she said that as a result, she “continues to suffer substantial losses in earnings, and other employment and retirement benefits,” among other repercussions.
Though JPMorgan declined to comment, in a response filed in California state court in May, the firm argued that Mireles had declined to arbitrate the dispute, despite allegedly signing agreements mandating that option in such a case.
Additionally, the firm claimed that it had provided Mireles with “reasonable accommodation” to satisfy California state law, but she was nevertheless “unable to perform the essential duties of the position in question even with reasonable accommodation and, further, could not perform those duties in a manner that would not have endangered her health or safety or the health and safety of others, even with reasonable accommodation.”
In an unrelated lawsuit, JPMorgan requested a temporary restraining order against a former bank branch advisor in Michigan who departed to work at Morgan Stanley.
According to that suit, Laura Sullivan left JPMorgan on May 15, after working as a private client advisor at the firm’s Nova, Mich., branch. According to the complaint, Sullivan solicited more than a dozen clients to join her at her new firm.
Among other things, Sullivan claimed that Morgan Stanley has more tools to help clients, its fees may be lower and that clients have more investment diversification options at the wirehouse.
JPMorgan argued the advisor violated non-solicitation agreements and wanted to “maintain the status quo” as FINRA arbitration progresses.
To date, JPMorgan believes she’s attracted about 15 households (with assets totaling about $14.5 million) to join her at Morgan Stanley, which declined to comment.
JPMorgan has frequently brought similar actions against former bank branch advisors, arguing that such reps are not expected to independently seek out their books of business and are instead introduced to potential clients within the branches. Last month, JPMorgan sought a TRO against a Florida-based former advisor who left for Ameriprise.