Preview
ADAM REISNER, ESQ., (State Bar No. 204351)
TESSA KING, ESQ., (State Bar No. 251408)
JARED IRMAS, ESQ. (State Bar No. 297246) FILED
S:perior Court of California
REISNER & KING LLP ounty of ! os Anneles
14724 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1210
Sherman Oaks, California 91403 DEC 13 2018
Phone: (818) 981-0901 ExeCulIVe Officer lori
Fax: (818) 981-0902
Attorneys for PLAINTIFF DEIRDRE LOGAN
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
*) Case No.: 18STCV08524
DEIRDRE LOGAN, )
10 ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES:
Plaintiff, )
) (1) ACTUAL/PERCEIVED
11 DISABILITY HARASSMENT,
) VIOLATION OF CAL. GOV. CODE
12 vs. ) §§12940ETSEQ; ~
)
13 ) (2) ACTUAL/PERCEIVED
14
WATTS HEALTHCARE CORPORATION; ) DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION,
DOES | THROUGH 100, inclusive, ) VIOLATION OF CAL. GOV. CODE
15 ) §§ 12940 ET SEQ.;
Defendants. )
16 ) (3) ACTUAL/PERCEIVED
) DISABILITY RETALIATION,
17 ) VIOLATION OF CAL. GOV. CODE
18 ) §§ 12940 ET SEQ.;
)
19 ) (4) VIOLATION OF THE
) CALIFORNIA FAMILY RIGHTS
20 ) ACT, CAL. GOV. CODE §§ 12945.2
) ET SEQ.;
21 )
22 ) (5) FOR VIOLATION OF THE
) CALIFORNIA PREGNANCY
23 ) DISABILITY LEAVE LAW
) (“PDLL”), CAL. GOV. CODE §
24 ) 12945
)
25 ) (6) SEX/GENDER HARASSMENT,
) VIOLATION OF THE FEHA;
26
)
27 ) (7) SEX/GENDER DISCRIMINATION,
) VIOLATION OF THE FEHA;
28 )
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
) (8) SEX/GENDER RETALIATION,
) VIOLATION OF THE FEHA;
)
) (9) FAILURE TO PAY WAGES;
)
) (10) BREACH OF CONTRACT;
)
) (11) BREACH OF GOOD FAITH AND
) FAIR DEALING;
)
)
(12) QUANTUM MERUIT
(13) PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
; (14) FRAUDULENT
5 MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT
10 ) 5) NEGLIGENT
11 MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT
2 (16) UNJUST ENRICHMENT
13 ) (17) CONVERSION AND THEFT OF
) LABOR
14 )
) (18) UNLAWFUL BUSINESS
15 ) PRACTICES IN VIOLATION OF
)
CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE §
16 17200; —
)
17 )
) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
18
19 COMES NOW PLAINTIFF DEIRDRE LOGAN (hereinafter referred to as “Logan” or
“Plaintiff’) and complains against the above-named Defendants and for causes of action against
21 the Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
22 I
23 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
24 For Actual/Perceived Disability Harassment in Employment
[California Government Code §§ 12940 ct seq.]
25
Against All Defendants & DOES 1 Through 100, Inclusive
26
I At alltimes mentioned herein, Plaintiff was, and now is, an individual domiciled in the
27
County of Los Angeles, State of California.
28
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Be Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that at all times relevant herein,
Defendant Watts Healthcare Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Watts Healthcare”) was, and now
is,a valid businesses and/or government entities and/or a political subdivisions thereof of form
unknown duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, having their
principal places of business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. At all times
relevant to this action, Watts Healthcare was an employer of Plaintiff.
3, Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities, whether corporate, associate,
individual, or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as DOES | - 100, inclusive, and therefore
sues said Defendants by such fictitiousnames. Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend this
Complaint to assert the true names and capacities of the fictitiously named Defendants when the
10
same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each
11
Defendant designated as “DOES” herein was, at all times relevant herein, an employer of
12
Plaintiff and is legally responsible for the events, happenings, acts, occurrences, indebtedness,
13
damages and liabilitieshereinafter alleged and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby
14
to the Plaintiff, as hereinafter alleged.
15
4, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times relevant herein,
16
each Defendant designated, including DOES | through 100, herein was the agent, partner, joint
17 venturer, alter ego, joint and special employer, representative, servant, employee, managing
agent, managing supervisor and/or co-conspirator of each of the other Defendants, and was at
19 all times mentioned herein acting within the course and scope of said agency and employment,
20 and that all acts or omissions alleged herein were duly committed with the ratification,
knowledge, permission, encouragement, authorization and consent of each Defendant
22 designated herein.
23 3; Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendants and DOES 1
24 through 100, herein are subject to such a degree of common ownership, control and management
Zs that, indoing the things hereinafter alleged, each entity, corporation and individual was the agent
of each other entity, corporation and individual and is liable to plaintiff under the law for the
26
damages sustained by plaintiff.
27
28
3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
6. Atall times mentioned herein each and every Defendant and DOES 1 through 100 was
the agent, representative, employee, servant or affiliated entity of every other defendant and, in
doing the acts herein alleged, each defendant isliable and responsible to plaintiff for the acts of
every other defendant.
t Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendants and DOES 1
through 100, and each of them, were thereafter her/her employers under California law, that all
of the Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, herein did acts consistent with the existence of an
employer-employee relationship with Plaintiff and all of the Defendants were owned and
controlled, directly or indirectly, by Defendants.
8. Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, a California Corporation, have such a unity of
10
interest and ownership that the separate personalities do not in reality exist and that the corporate
11
structure isjust a shield for the alter ego of each other. Inequity will result if the acts inquestion
12
are treated as those of one of these Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, over the
13
other. Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, should be held collectively liable for the acts
14 complained of herein.
15 9, Dr. Logan has been employed by Watts Healthcare Corp. since 2005, firstas an OB/GYN,
16 and then, beginning in 2008, as Chief of OB/GYN. Plaintiff performed work in, among other
17 locations, the county of Los Angeles, where Plaintiff was injured by unlawful conduct of
18 Defendants.
19 10. At all times relevant herein, as an employee disabled by a severe and debilitating
20 disability, including pregnancy and complications from pregnancy, among other related
21 conditions and/or disabilities. Plaintiff was a member of a protected class pursuant to the Fair
22 Employment & Housing Act.
23 11. Atal] times relevant herein, Plaintiff was an actual, perceived, and/or potentially disabled
24 person within the meaning of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12926.1(b) et seq., because Plaintiff was a
25 person with an actual,perceived, potentially disabling, and/or potentially disabling in the future
26 physical/mental disability(s) including, but not limited to: pregnancy and complications from
27 pregnancy, among other related conditions and/or disabilities.
28
4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
12. Plaintiff's impairments affect Plaintiffs musculoskeletal body system and ability to
perform major life activities,such as working.
13. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was able to perform the essential functions of
Plaintiff's job either with and/or without reasonable accommodations.
14. Ona severe and/or pervasive basis during Plaintiff's employment with Defendants Watts
Healthcare, and continuing through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants and DOES
1 through 100, and each of them, harassed Plaintiff due to and substantially motivated by
Plaintiff's actual/perceived disabilities, need for accommodations, and/or need for protected
finite medical leave through the following actions, among others:
10 a) In or around May 2013, Plaintiff took legally-protected leave due to pregnancy
il complications.
12 b) When she returned to work, unbeknownst to her at the time, Watts Healthcare
13 reduced Plaintiff's salary as harassment, disetmination, and retaliation based on her
14 pregnancy and need for medical leave.
15 c) Further, Plaintiff was made an hourly employee upon returning to work, capped at
16 36 hours per week, even though she works more than 36 hours.
17 d) Plaintiff was treated differently, disparately, and negatively because of her
18 actual/perceived disabilities, including but not limited to Defendants harassing Plaintiff
19 (as aforesaid), failing to initiate and thereafter participate in the mandatory good-faith
20 interactive process to determine the nature and extent of Plaintiff's disabilities and
21 determine whether reasonable accommodations were possible, failing to provide Plaintiff
2 reasonable accommodations, denying Plaintiff opportunities, unfairly disciplining
23 Plaintiff, overly monitoring and scrutinizing Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff benefits, and
24 refusing toreturn Plaintiff back to Plaintiffs former position or offer Plaintiff employment
in any capacity, and failing to rehire Plaintiff.
° 26 e) At least through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants failed and/or
27 refused to investigate Plaintiff's complaints and take appropriate remedial actions.
28
o
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
15. In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants and DOES 1through 100, and each of them,
were substantially motivated by Plaintiff's actual/perceived disabilities, need for
accommodations, and/or need for legally protected finite medical leave.
16, A reasonable person in Plaintiffs circumstances would have considered the work
environment to be hostile or abusive.
17. Plaintiff considered the work environment tobe hostile or abusive towards Plaintiff.
18. Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff believes and further alleges that Defendants Watts
Healthcare and/or its agents/representatives failed to timely, properly, and/or completely
investigate the harassment Plaintiff was routinely subjected to and ratified and condoned the
unlawful behavior.
19. The acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as
aforesaid, were in violation of Cal. Government Code §§ 12940 et seq. Said statutes impose
certain duties upon Defendants concerning harassment against persons, such as Plaintiff, on the
basis of actual/perceived disabilities and the prohibition of actual/perceived disability
harassment. Said statutes were intended to prevent the type of disability and damage herein set
forth.
20. By the acts and conduct described above, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each
of them, in violation of said statutes, knew about, or should have known about, and failed to
investigate and/or properly investigate, prevent or remedy the disability harassment.
21. Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, Plaintiff filed a timely complaint against each named
Defendant with the DFEH pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 12900 et seq. and has received
Right-to-Sue notices in a California Superior Court pursuant to California Government Code §
12965(b). Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” are said Complaints and by
reference hereto are made a part hereof. Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B”
are said Right-to-Sue notices and by reference hereto are made a part hereof. Plaintiff has
therefore exhausted Plaintiffs administrative remedies under the California Government Code.
6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
22. Asa direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through
100, Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both internally and/or
externally, and/or suffered, among other things, numerous internal injuries, severe fright, shock,
pain, discomfort and/or anxiety.
23. Asa further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100,
Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or
laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiffs disability, and/or isinformed and believes, and
thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same
nature, allin an amount which isat present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show
10 the exact amount of said expenses at the time of trial.
11 24. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiffwas an able-bodied individual, but since
12 said incidents has been unable to engage fully and/or partially in Plaintiff's occupation, and is
13 informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will be fully and/or partially
14 incapacitated and/or unable to perform Plaintiff's usual work for an indefinite period of time in
the future, all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount which is atpresent unascertained. Plaintiff will
16 pray leave of court to show the total amount of loss of earnings at the time of trial.
17 25. Asa further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1
18 through 100, Plaintiff has been caused, and did suffer, and continues to suffer severe and
19 permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright,
20 shock, pain, discomfort and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries is presently
21 unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they are ascertained.
22 26. The aforementioned acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, were
23 willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, oppressive and/or despicable and were done in willful
24 and conscious disregard of the rights, welfare and safety of Plaintiff, and were done by
25 managerial agents and employees of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES 1 through 100,
26 and with the express knowledge, consent, and/or ratification of managerial agents and employees
27 of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES | through 100, thereby justifying the awarding of
28
7
_ COMPLAINT FORDAMAGES
punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at the time
of trialpursuant to California Civil Code § 3294(a) and (b).
27. By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has
been directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to California Civil Code §
3333 including, but not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and
related expenses for care and procedures both now and in the future, attorneys’ fees, and other
pecuniary loss not presently ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend
when ascertained.
28. Asaresult of the harassing acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, as alleged herein,
Plaintiff isentitled toreasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of said suitas specifically provided in
11 California Government Code § 12965(b).
12 29. The FEHA also provides remedies, including but not limited to, declaratory and injunctive
13 relief. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to both declaratory and injunctive relief as a result of
14 Defendants’ unlawful conduct.
15 30. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
16 II.
17 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
18 For Actual/Perceived Disability Discrimination in Employment
19 [California Government Code §§ 12940 et seq.|
20 Against Defendants Watts Healthcare & DOES 1 Through 100, Only
21 31. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference and re-alleges each and every paragraph in this
22 Complaint as though duly set forth in full herein.
23 32. Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff was an actual, perceived, and/or potentially disabled
24 person within the meaning of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12926.1(b) et seq., because Plaintiff was a
25 person with an actual, perceived, potentially disabling, and/or potentially disabling inthe future
26 physical/mental disability(s) including, but not limited to: pregnancy and complications from
27 pregnancy, among other related conditions and/or disabilities.
28
8
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
33. At all times relevant herein, Defendants Watts Healthcare had notice of Plaintiff's
disabilities and/or need for accommodations. For example, Plaintiff notified her supervisors and
managers of her disabilities and requested reasonable accommodations.
34, Plaintiff's impairments affect her musculoskeletal body system and ability to perform
major lifeactivities, such as working.
35. At all times relevant herein, as an employee disabled by a severe and debilitating
disability, Plaintiff was a member of a protected class.
36. Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff was qualified for and/or competently performed the
position(s) held throughout her employment with Defendants Watts Healthcare.
10 37, Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff was able to perform the essential functions of her job
11 either with and/or without reasonable accommodations.
12 38. Starting during Plaintiff's employment, and continuing through December 13, 2018, and
13 continuing, as a result of and substantially motivated by Plaintiff’s actual/perccived disabilities,
14 need for accommodations, and/or need for protected finite leave, Defendants and DOES 1
15 through 100, and each of them, subjected Plaintiff to discriminatory treatment and/or adverse
16 employment actions, including the following actions, among others:
17 a) In or around May 2013, Plaintiff took legally-protected leave due to pregnancy
18 complications.
19 b) When she returned to work, unbeknownst to her at the time, Watts Healthcare
20 reduced Plaintiff's salary as harassment, discrimination, and retaliation based on her
21 pregnancy and need for medical leave.
22 Cc) Further, Plaintiff was made an hourly employee upon returning to work, capped at
23 36 hours per week, even though she works more than 36 hours.
24 d) Plaintiff was treated differently, disparately, and negatively because of her
20 actual/perceived disabilities, including but not limited to Defendants harassing Plaintiff
26 (as aforesaid), failing to initiate and thereafter participate in the mandatory good-faith
27 interactive process to determine the nature and extent of Plaintiff's disabilities and
28
9
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
determine whether reasonable accommodations were possible, failing to provide Plaintiff
reasonable accommodations, denying Plaintiff opportunities, unfairly disciplining
Plaintiff, overly monitoring and scrutinizing Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff benefits, and
refusing toreturn Plaintiff back toPlaintiff's former position or offer Plaintiffemployment
in any capacity, and failing to rehire Plaintiff.
e) At least through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants failed and/or
refused to investigate Plaintiff's complaints and take appropriate remedial actions.
39. In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them,
were substantially motivated by Plaintiffs actual/perceived disabilities, need for
10 accommodations, and/or need for legally protected finite medical leave.
11 40. At alltimes relevant herein, Plaintiff believes and further alleges that Defendants Watts
12 Healthcare and/or its agents/representatives failed to timely, properly, and/or completely
13 investigate the discrimination Plaintiff was routinely subjected to and ratified and condoned the
14 unlawful behavior.
15 41. The acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES | through 100, and each of them, as
16 aforesaid, were in violation of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12940 et seq. Said statutes impose certain
17 duties upon Defendants Watts Healthcare concerning discrimination against persons, such as
18 Plaintiff, on the basis of disabilities and the prohibition of disability discrimination. Said statutes
19 were intended to prevent the type of injury and damage herein set forth.
20 42. By the acts and conduct described above, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each
ot of them, in violation of said statutes, knew about, or should have known about, and failed to
22 investigate and/or properly investigate, prevent or remedy the actual/perceived disability
pn 2 discrimination. When Plaintiff was discriminated against, Plaintiffs actual/perceived
24 disability(s) were substantial motivating reasons and/or factors in Defendants’ conduct.
43. Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, Plaintifffiled a timely complaint against each named
26 Defendant with the DFEH pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 12900 et seq. and has received
27 Right-to-Sue notices in a California Superior Court pursuant to California Government Code §
28
10
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
12965(b). Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” are said Complaints and by
reference hereto are made a part hereof. Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B”
are said Right-to-Sue notices and by reference hereto are made a part hereof. Plaintiff has
therefore exhausted Plaintiff's administrative remedies under the California Government Code.
44. Asa direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through
100, Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both internally and/or
externally, and/or suffered, among other things, numerous internal injuries, severe fright, shock,
pain, discomfort and/or anxiety.
45. Asa further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1through 100,
10 Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or
11 laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiffs disability, and/or isinformed and believes, and
thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same
13 nature, allin an amount which isat present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show
14 the exact amount of said expenses at the time of trial.
15 46. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiff was an able-bodied individual, but since
16 said incidents has been unable to engage fully and/or partially in Plaintiffs occupation, and is
17 informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will be fully and/or partially
18 incapacitated and/or unable to perform Plaintiff's usual work for an indefinite period of time in
19 the future, all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount which is atpresent unascertained. Plaintiff will
20 pray leave of court to show the total amount of loss of earnings at the time of trial.
21 47. Asa further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1
2 through 100, Plaintiff has been caused, and did suffer, and continues to suffer severe and
gw 2 permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright,
ve 24 shock, pain, discomfort and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries is presently
> 25 unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they are ascertained.
co 26 48. The aforementioned acts of Defendants and DOES | through 100, and each of them, were
27 willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, oppressive and/or despicable and were done in willful
28
11
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
and conscious disregard of the rights, welfare and safety of Plaintiff, and were done by
managerial agents and employees of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES | through 100,
and with the express knowledge, consent, and/or ratificationof managerial agents and employees
of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES 1|through 100, thereby justifying the awarding of
punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at the time
of trialpursuant to California Civil Code § 3294(a) and (b).
49, By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has
been directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to California Civil Code §
3333 including, but not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and
10 related expenses for care and procedures both now and in the future, attorneys’ fees, and other
11 pecuniary loss not presently ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend
12 when ascertained. |
13 50. As a result of the discriminatory acts of Defendants and DOES 1through 100, as alleged
14 herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of said suit as specifically
15 provided in California Government Code § 12965(b),
16 51. The FEHA also provides remedies, including but not limited to, declaratory and injunctive
17 relief. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to both declaratory and injunctive relief as a result of
18 Defendants’ unlawful conduct.
19 52. Plaintiff has been damaged inan amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
20 Ill.
21 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
22 For Actual/Perceived Disability Retaliation in Employment
23 [California Government Code §§ 12940 et seq.]
24 Against Defendants Watts Healthcare & DOES 1 Through 100, Only
25 53. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference and re-alleges each and every paragraph in this
26 Complaint as though duly set forth in full herein.
27 54, Plaintiff was, at alltimes material hereto, a disabled employee (and one who engaged in
28 legally protected conduct) and within a protected class covered by Cal. Gov. Code § 12940, as
12
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Plaintiff suffered from a severe and debilitating disability, including pregnancy and
complications from pregnancy, among other related conditions and/or disabilities.
55. Plaintiff's impairments affect her musculoskeletal body system and ability to perform
major life activities,such as working.
56. Starting during Plaintiff's employment, and continuing through December 13, 2018, and
continuing, Defendants Watts Healthcare retaliated against Plaintiff as a result of Plaintiff
asserting her legal rights and/or complaining about and/or protesting against the disability
harassment and discrimination Plaintiff was subjected to.
57. Plaintiff asserted her legal rights, for example partaking in protected activity and
10 protesting and complaining, on the following occasions, among others:
11 a) Plaintiff routinely complained toDefendants about their unlawful refusal to return
12 her to the full-time salaried terms of her employment, based on her disabilitiesand medical
13 leave.
14 58. However, Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them,
15 retaliated against Plaintiff, due to and substantially motivated by Plaintiff's actual/perceived
16 disability(s), requesting accommodations, or protected finite leave, and/or due to Plaintiff
17 engaging in the aforesaid legally protected activities (complaints/protests), through the following
18 actions, among others:
19 a) In or around May 2013, Plaintiff took legally-protected leave due to pregnancy
20 complications.
21 b) When she returned to work, unbeknownst to her at the time, Watts Healthcare
22 reduced Plaintiff's salary as harassment, discrimination, and retaliation based on her
23 pregnancy and need for medical leave.
24 c) Further, Plaintiff was made an hourly employee upon returning to work, capped at
25 36 hours per week, even though she works more than 36 hours.
26 d) Plaintiff was treated differently, disparately, and negatively because of her
27 actual/perceived disabilities, including but not limited to Defendants harassing Plaintiff
28
13
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
(as aforesaid), failing to initiate and thereafter participate in the mandatory good-faith
interactive process to determine the nature and extent of Plaintiff's disabilities and
determine whether reasonable accommodations were possible, failing to provide Plaintiff
reasonable ‘accommodations, denying Plaintiff opportunities, unfairly disciplining
Plaintiff, overly monitoring and scrutinizing Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff benefits, and
refusing to return Plaintiff back toPlaintiffs former position or offer Plaintiff employment
in any capacity, and failing to rehire Plaintiff.
e) At least through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants failed and/or
refused to investigate Plaintiff's complaints and take appropriate remedial actions.
10 59, In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them,
11 were substantially motivated by Plaintiffs actual/perceived disabilities, need for
12 accommodations, need for legally protected medical leave, and/or aforesaid legally protected
13 activities (complaints/protests).
14 60. At alltimes relevant herein, Plaintiff believes and further alleges that Defendants Watts
15 Healthcare and/or its agents/representatives failed to timely, properly, and/or completely
16 investigate the retaliation Plaintiff was routinely subjected to and ratified and condoned the
17 unlawful behavior.
18 61. The acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as
19 aforesaid, were in violation of California Government Code §§ 12940 et seq. Said statutes
20 impose certain duties upon Defendants, and each of them, concerning retaliation against persons,
21 such as Plaintiff, on the basis of disabilities and the prohibition of actual/perceived disability
22 retaliation. Said statutes were intended to prevent the type of injury and damage herein set forth.
23 62. By the acts and conduct described above, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each
24 of them, in violation of said statutes, knew about, or should have known about, and failed to
25 investigate and/or properly
Preview
ADAM REISNER, ESQ., (State Bar No. 204351) TESSA KING, ESQ., (State Bar No. 251408) JARED IRMAS, ESQ. (State Bar No. 297246) FILED S:perior Court of California REISNER & KING LLP ounty of ! os Anneles 14724 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1210 Sherman Oaks, California 91403 DEC 13 2018 Phone: (818) 981-0901 ExeCulIVe Officer lori Fax: (818) 981-0902 Attorneys for PLAINTIFF DEIRDRE LOGAN SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES *) Case No.: 18STCV08524 DEIRDRE LOGAN, ) 10 ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: Plaintiff, ) ) (1) ACTUAL/PERCEIVED 11 DISABILITY HARASSMENT, ) VIOLATION OF CAL. GOV. CODE 12 vs. ) §§12940ETSEQ; ~ ) 13 ) (2) ACTUAL/PERCEIVED 14 WATTS HEALTHCARE CORPORATION; ) DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION, DOES | THROUGH 100, inclusive, ) VIOLATION OF CAL. GOV. CODE 15 ) §§ 12940 ET SEQ.; Defendants. ) 16 ) (3) ACTUAL/PERCEIVED ) DISABILITY RETALIATION, 17 ) VIOLATION OF CAL. GOV. CODE 18 ) §§ 12940 ET SEQ.; ) 19 ) (4) VIOLATION OF THE ) CALIFORNIA FAMILY RIGHTS 20 ) ACT, CAL. GOV. CODE §§ 12945.2 ) ET SEQ.; 21 ) 22 ) (5) FOR VIOLATION OF THE ) CALIFORNIA PREGNANCY 23 ) DISABILITY LEAVE LAW ) (“PDLL”), CAL. GOV. CODE § 24 ) 12945 ) 25 ) (6) SEX/GENDER HARASSMENT, ) VIOLATION OF THE FEHA; 26 ) 27 ) (7) SEX/GENDER DISCRIMINATION, ) VIOLATION OF THE FEHA; 28 ) 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES ) (8) SEX/GENDER RETALIATION, ) VIOLATION OF THE FEHA; ) ) (9) FAILURE TO PAY WAGES; ) ) (10) BREACH OF CONTRACT; ) ) (11) BREACH OF GOOD FAITH AND ) FAIR DEALING; ) ) (12) QUANTUM MERUIT (13) PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL ; (14) FRAUDULENT 5 MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT 10 ) 5) NEGLIGENT 11 MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT 2 (16) UNJUST ENRICHMENT 13 ) (17) CONVERSION AND THEFT OF ) LABOR 14 ) ) (18) UNLAWFUL BUSINESS 15 ) PRACTICES IN VIOLATION OF ) CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE § 16 17200; — ) 17 ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 18 19 COMES NOW PLAINTIFF DEIRDRE LOGAN (hereinafter referred to as “Logan” or “Plaintiff’) and complains against the above-named Defendants and for causes of action against 21 the Defendants, and each of them, as follows: 22 I 23 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 24 For Actual/Perceived Disability Harassment in Employment [California Government Code §§ 12940 ct seq.] 25 Against All Defendants & DOES 1 Through 100, Inclusive 26 I At alltimes mentioned herein, Plaintiff was, and now is, an individual domiciled in the 27 County of Los Angeles, State of California. 28 2 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Be Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that at all times relevant herein, Defendant Watts Healthcare Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Watts Healthcare”) was, and now is,a valid businesses and/or government entities and/or a political subdivisions thereof of form unknown duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, having their principal places of business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. At all times relevant to this action, Watts Healthcare was an employer of Plaintiff. 3, Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities, whether corporate, associate, individual, or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as DOES | - 100, inclusive, and therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitiousnames. Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint to assert the true names and capacities of the fictitiously named Defendants when the 10 same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each 11 Defendant designated as “DOES” herein was, at all times relevant herein, an employer of 12 Plaintiff and is legally responsible for the events, happenings, acts, occurrences, indebtedness, 13 damages and liabilitieshereinafter alleged and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby 14 to the Plaintiff, as hereinafter alleged. 15 4, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times relevant herein, 16 each Defendant designated, including DOES | through 100, herein was the agent, partner, joint 17 venturer, alter ego, joint and special employer, representative, servant, employee, managing agent, managing supervisor and/or co-conspirator of each of the other Defendants, and was at 19 all times mentioned herein acting within the course and scope of said agency and employment, 20 and that all acts or omissions alleged herein were duly committed with the ratification, knowledge, permission, encouragement, authorization and consent of each Defendant 22 designated herein. 23 3; Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendants and DOES 1 24 through 100, herein are subject to such a degree of common ownership, control and management Zs that, indoing the things hereinafter alleged, each entity, corporation and individual was the agent of each other entity, corporation and individual and is liable to plaintiff under the law for the 26 damages sustained by plaintiff. 27 28 3 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 6. Atall times mentioned herein each and every Defendant and DOES 1 through 100 was the agent, representative, employee, servant or affiliated entity of every other defendant and, in doing the acts herein alleged, each defendant isliable and responsible to plaintiff for the acts of every other defendant. t Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, were thereafter her/her employers under California law, that all of the Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, herein did acts consistent with the existence of an employer-employee relationship with Plaintiff and all of the Defendants were owned and controlled, directly or indirectly, by Defendants. 8. Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, a California Corporation, have such a unity of 10 interest and ownership that the separate personalities do not in reality exist and that the corporate 11 structure isjust a shield for the alter ego of each other. Inequity will result if the acts inquestion 12 are treated as those of one of these Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, over the 13 other. Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, should be held collectively liable for the acts 14 complained of herein. 15 9, Dr. Logan has been employed by Watts Healthcare Corp. since 2005, firstas an OB/GYN, 16 and then, beginning in 2008, as Chief of OB/GYN. Plaintiff performed work in, among other 17 locations, the county of Los Angeles, where Plaintiff was injured by unlawful conduct of 18 Defendants. 19 10. At all times relevant herein, as an employee disabled by a severe and debilitating 20 disability, including pregnancy and complications from pregnancy, among other related 21 conditions and/or disabilities. Plaintiff was a member of a protected class pursuant to the Fair 22 Employment & Housing Act. 23 11. Atal] times relevant herein, Plaintiff was an actual, perceived, and/or potentially disabled 24 person within the meaning of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12926.1(b) et seq., because Plaintiff was a 25 person with an actual,perceived, potentially disabling, and/or potentially disabling in the future 26 physical/mental disability(s) including, but not limited to: pregnancy and complications from 27 pregnancy, among other related conditions and/or disabilities. 28 4 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 12. Plaintiff's impairments affect Plaintiffs musculoskeletal body system and ability to perform major life activities,such as working. 13. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was able to perform the essential functions of Plaintiff's job either with and/or without reasonable accommodations. 14. Ona severe and/or pervasive basis during Plaintiff's employment with Defendants Watts Healthcare, and continuing through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, harassed Plaintiff due to and substantially motivated by Plaintiff's actual/perceived disabilities, need for accommodations, and/or need for protected finite medical leave through the following actions, among others: 10 a) In or around May 2013, Plaintiff took legally-protected leave due to pregnancy il complications. 12 b) When she returned to work, unbeknownst to her at the time, Watts Healthcare 13 reduced Plaintiff's salary as harassment, disetmination, and retaliation based on her 14 pregnancy and need for medical leave. 15 c) Further, Plaintiff was made an hourly employee upon returning to work, capped at 16 36 hours per week, even though she works more than 36 hours. 17 d) Plaintiff was treated differently, disparately, and negatively because of her 18 actual/perceived disabilities, including but not limited to Defendants harassing Plaintiff 19 (as aforesaid), failing to initiate and thereafter participate in the mandatory good-faith 20 interactive process to determine the nature and extent of Plaintiff's disabilities and 21 determine whether reasonable accommodations were possible, failing to provide Plaintiff 2 reasonable accommodations, denying Plaintiff opportunities, unfairly disciplining 23 Plaintiff, overly monitoring and scrutinizing Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff benefits, and 24 refusing toreturn Plaintiff back to Plaintiffs former position or offer Plaintiff employment in any capacity, and failing to rehire Plaintiff. ° 26 e) At least through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants failed and/or 27 refused to investigate Plaintiff's complaints and take appropriate remedial actions. 28 o COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 15. In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants and DOES 1through 100, and each of them, were substantially motivated by Plaintiff's actual/perceived disabilities, need for accommodations, and/or need for legally protected finite medical leave. 16, A reasonable person in Plaintiffs circumstances would have considered the work environment to be hostile or abusive. 17. Plaintiff considered the work environment tobe hostile or abusive towards Plaintiff. 18. Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff believes and further alleges that Defendants Watts Healthcare and/or its agents/representatives failed to timely, properly, and/or completely investigate the harassment Plaintiff was routinely subjected to and ratified and condoned the unlawful behavior. 19. The acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as aforesaid, were in violation of Cal. Government Code §§ 12940 et seq. Said statutes impose certain duties upon Defendants concerning harassment against persons, such as Plaintiff, on the basis of actual/perceived disabilities and the prohibition of actual/perceived disability harassment. Said statutes were intended to prevent the type of disability and damage herein set forth. 20. By the acts and conduct described above, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, in violation of said statutes, knew about, or should have known about, and failed to investigate and/or properly investigate, prevent or remedy the disability harassment. 21. Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, Plaintiff filed a timely complaint against each named Defendant with the DFEH pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 12900 et seq. and has received Right-to-Sue notices in a California Superior Court pursuant to California Government Code § 12965(b). Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” are said Complaints and by reference hereto are made a part hereof. Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B” are said Right-to-Sue notices and by reference hereto are made a part hereof. Plaintiff has therefore exhausted Plaintiffs administrative remedies under the California Government Code. 6 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 22. Asa direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both internally and/or externally, and/or suffered, among other things, numerous internal injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort and/or anxiety. 23. Asa further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiffs disability, and/or isinformed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same nature, allin an amount which isat present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show 10 the exact amount of said expenses at the time of trial. 11 24. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiffwas an able-bodied individual, but since 12 said incidents has been unable to engage fully and/or partially in Plaintiff's occupation, and is 13 informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will be fully and/or partially 14 incapacitated and/or unable to perform Plaintiff's usual work for an indefinite period of time in the future, all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount which is atpresent unascertained. Plaintiff will 16 pray leave of court to show the total amount of loss of earnings at the time of trial. 17 25. Asa further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 18 through 100, Plaintiff has been caused, and did suffer, and continues to suffer severe and 19 permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright, 20 shock, pain, discomfort and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries is presently 21 unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they are ascertained. 22 26. The aforementioned acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, were 23 willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, oppressive and/or despicable and were done in willful 24 and conscious disregard of the rights, welfare and safety of Plaintiff, and were done by 25 managerial agents and employees of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES 1 through 100, 26 and with the express knowledge, consent, and/or ratification of managerial agents and employees 27 of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES | through 100, thereby justifying the awarding of 28 7 _ COMPLAINT FORDAMAGES punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at the time of trialpursuant to California Civil Code § 3294(a) and (b). 27. By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3333 including, but not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and related expenses for care and procedures both now and in the future, attorneys’ fees, and other pecuniary loss not presently ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend when ascertained. 28. Asaresult of the harassing acts of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, as alleged herein, Plaintiff isentitled toreasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of said suitas specifically provided in 11 California Government Code § 12965(b). 12 29. The FEHA also provides remedies, including but not limited to, declaratory and injunctive 13 relief. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to both declaratory and injunctive relief as a result of 14 Defendants’ unlawful conduct. 15 30. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 16 II. 17 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 18 For Actual/Perceived Disability Discrimination in Employment 19 [California Government Code §§ 12940 et seq.| 20 Against Defendants Watts Healthcare & DOES 1 Through 100, Only 21 31. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference and re-alleges each and every paragraph in this 22 Complaint as though duly set forth in full herein. 23 32. Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff was an actual, perceived, and/or potentially disabled 24 person within the meaning of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12926.1(b) et seq., because Plaintiff was a 25 person with an actual, perceived, potentially disabling, and/or potentially disabling inthe future 26 physical/mental disability(s) including, but not limited to: pregnancy and complications from 27 pregnancy, among other related conditions and/or disabilities. 28 8 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 33. At all times relevant herein, Defendants Watts Healthcare had notice of Plaintiff's disabilities and/or need for accommodations. For example, Plaintiff notified her supervisors and managers of her disabilities and requested reasonable accommodations. 34, Plaintiff's impairments affect her musculoskeletal body system and ability to perform major lifeactivities, such as working. 35. At all times relevant herein, as an employee disabled by a severe and debilitating disability, Plaintiff was a member of a protected class. 36. Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff was qualified for and/or competently performed the position(s) held throughout her employment with Defendants Watts Healthcare. 10 37, Atall times relevant herein, Plaintiff was able to perform the essential functions of her job 11 either with and/or without reasonable accommodations. 12 38. Starting during Plaintiff's employment, and continuing through December 13, 2018, and 13 continuing, as a result of and substantially motivated by Plaintiff’s actual/perccived disabilities, 14 need for accommodations, and/or need for protected finite leave, Defendants and DOES 1 15 through 100, and each of them, subjected Plaintiff to discriminatory treatment and/or adverse 16 employment actions, including the following actions, among others: 17 a) In or around May 2013, Plaintiff took legally-protected leave due to pregnancy 18 complications. 19 b) When she returned to work, unbeknownst to her at the time, Watts Healthcare 20 reduced Plaintiff's salary as harassment, discrimination, and retaliation based on her 21 pregnancy and need for medical leave. 22 Cc) Further, Plaintiff was made an hourly employee upon returning to work, capped at 23 36 hours per week, even though she works more than 36 hours. 24 d) Plaintiff was treated differently, disparately, and negatively because of her 20 actual/perceived disabilities, including but not limited to Defendants harassing Plaintiff 26 (as aforesaid), failing to initiate and thereafter participate in the mandatory good-faith 27 interactive process to determine the nature and extent of Plaintiff's disabilities and 28 9 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES determine whether reasonable accommodations were possible, failing to provide Plaintiff reasonable accommodations, denying Plaintiff opportunities, unfairly disciplining Plaintiff, overly monitoring and scrutinizing Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff benefits, and refusing toreturn Plaintiff back toPlaintiff's former position or offer Plaintiffemployment in any capacity, and failing to rehire Plaintiff. e) At least through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants failed and/or refused to investigate Plaintiff's complaints and take appropriate remedial actions. 39. In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, were substantially motivated by Plaintiffs actual/perceived disabilities, need for 10 accommodations, and/or need for legally protected finite medical leave. 11 40. At alltimes relevant herein, Plaintiff believes and further alleges that Defendants Watts 12 Healthcare and/or its agents/representatives failed to timely, properly, and/or completely 13 investigate the discrimination Plaintiff was routinely subjected to and ratified and condoned the 14 unlawful behavior. 15 41. The acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES | through 100, and each of them, as 16 aforesaid, were in violation of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12940 et seq. Said statutes impose certain 17 duties upon Defendants Watts Healthcare concerning discrimination against persons, such as 18 Plaintiff, on the basis of disabilities and the prohibition of disability discrimination. Said statutes 19 were intended to prevent the type of injury and damage herein set forth. 20 42. By the acts and conduct described above, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each ot of them, in violation of said statutes, knew about, or should have known about, and failed to 22 investigate and/or properly investigate, prevent or remedy the actual/perceived disability pn 2 discrimination. When Plaintiff was discriminated against, Plaintiffs actual/perceived 24 disability(s) were substantial motivating reasons and/or factors in Defendants’ conduct. 43. Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, Plaintifffiled a timely complaint against each named 26 Defendant with the DFEH pursuant to Cal. Government Code § 12900 et seq. and has received 27 Right-to-Sue notices in a California Superior Court pursuant to California Government Code § 28 10 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 12965(b). Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” are said Complaints and by reference hereto are made a part hereof. Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B” are said Right-to-Sue notices and by reference hereto are made a part hereof. Plaintiff has therefore exhausted Plaintiff's administrative remedies under the California Government Code. 44. Asa direct and legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff was rendered sick, sore, lame, disabled and/or disordered, both internally and/or externally, and/or suffered, among other things, numerous internal injuries, severe fright, shock, pain, discomfort and/or anxiety. 45. Asa further legal result of the acts and omissions of Defendants and DOES 1through 100, 10 Plaintiff has been forced and/or will be forced to incur expenses for medical care, X-rays, and/or 11 laboratory costs during the period of Plaintiffs disability, and/or isinformed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will in the future be forced to incur additional expenses of the same 13 nature, allin an amount which isat present unknown. Plaintiff will pray leave of court to show 14 the exact amount of said expenses at the time of trial. 15 46. Prior to the occurrence of the incidents, Plaintiff was an able-bodied individual, but since 16 said incidents has been unable to engage fully and/or partially in Plaintiffs occupation, and is 17 informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff will be fully and/or partially 18 incapacitated and/or unable to perform Plaintiff's usual work for an indefinite period of time in 19 the future, all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount which is atpresent unascertained. Plaintiff will 20 pray leave of court to show the total amount of loss of earnings at the time of trial. 21 47. Asa further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 2 through 100, Plaintiff has been caused, and did suffer, and continues to suffer severe and gw 2 permanent emotional and/or mental distress and/or anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright, ve 24 shock, pain, discomfort and/or anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said injuries is presently > 25 unknown to Plaintiff, who will pray leave of court to assert the same when they are ascertained. co 26 48. The aforementioned acts of Defendants and DOES | through 100, and each of them, were 27 willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, oppressive and/or despicable and were done in willful 28 11 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES and conscious disregard of the rights, welfare and safety of Plaintiff, and were done by managerial agents and employees of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES | through 100, and with the express knowledge, consent, and/or ratificationof managerial agents and employees of Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES 1|through 100, thereby justifying the awarding of punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at the time of trialpursuant to California Civil Code § 3294(a) and (b). 49, By the aforesaid acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, Plaintiff has been directly and legally caused to suffer actual damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3333 including, but not limited to, loss of earnings and future earning capacity, medical and 10 related expenses for care and procedures both now and in the future, attorneys’ fees, and other 11 pecuniary loss not presently ascertained, for which Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend 12 when ascertained. | 13 50. As a result of the discriminatory acts of Defendants and DOES 1through 100, as alleged 14 herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of said suit as specifically 15 provided in California Government Code § 12965(b), 16 51. The FEHA also provides remedies, including but not limited to, declaratory and injunctive 17 relief. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to both declaratory and injunctive relief as a result of 18 Defendants’ unlawful conduct. 19 52. Plaintiff has been damaged inan amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 20 Ill. 21 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 22 For Actual/Perceived Disability Retaliation in Employment 23 [California Government Code §§ 12940 et seq.] 24 Against Defendants Watts Healthcare & DOES 1 Through 100, Only 25 53. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference and re-alleges each and every paragraph in this 26 Complaint as though duly set forth in full herein. 27 54, Plaintiff was, at alltimes material hereto, a disabled employee (and one who engaged in 28 legally protected conduct) and within a protected class covered by Cal. Gov. Code § 12940, as 12 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Plaintiff suffered from a severe and debilitating disability, including pregnancy and complications from pregnancy, among other related conditions and/or disabilities. 55. Plaintiff's impairments affect her musculoskeletal body system and ability to perform major life activities,such as working. 56. Starting during Plaintiff's employment, and continuing through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants Watts Healthcare retaliated against Plaintiff as a result of Plaintiff asserting her legal rights and/or complaining about and/or protesting against the disability harassment and discrimination Plaintiff was subjected to. 57. Plaintiff asserted her legal rights, for example partaking in protected activity and 10 protesting and complaining, on the following occasions, among others: 11 a) Plaintiff routinely complained toDefendants about their unlawful refusal to return 12 her to the full-time salaried terms of her employment, based on her disabilitiesand medical 13 leave. 14 58. However, Defendants Watts Healthcare and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, 15 retaliated against Plaintiff, due to and substantially motivated by Plaintiff's actual/perceived 16 disability(s), requesting accommodations, or protected finite leave, and/or due to Plaintiff 17 engaging in the aforesaid legally protected activities (complaints/protests), through the following 18 actions, among others: 19 a) In or around May 2013, Plaintiff took legally-protected leave due to pregnancy 20 complications. 21 b) When she returned to work, unbeknownst to her at the time, Watts Healthcare 22 reduced Plaintiff's salary as harassment, discrimination, and retaliation based on her 23 pregnancy and need for medical leave. 24 c) Further, Plaintiff was made an hourly employee upon returning to work, capped at 25 36 hours per week, even though she works more than 36 hours. 26 d) Plaintiff was treated differently, disparately, and negatively because of her 27 actual/perceived disabilities, including but not limited to Defendants harassing Plaintiff 28 13 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (as aforesaid), failing to initiate and thereafter participate in the mandatory good-faith interactive process to determine the nature and extent of Plaintiff's disabilities and determine whether reasonable accommodations were possible, failing to provide Plaintiff reasonable ‘accommodations, denying Plaintiff opportunities, unfairly disciplining Plaintiff, overly monitoring and scrutinizing Plaintiff, denying Plaintiff benefits, and refusing to return Plaintiff back toPlaintiffs former position or offer Plaintiff employment in any capacity, and failing to rehire Plaintiff. e) At least through December 13, 2018, and continuing, Defendants failed and/or refused to investigate Plaintiff's complaints and take appropriate remedial actions. 10 59, In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, 11 were substantially motivated by Plaintiffs actual/perceived disabilities, need for 12 accommodations, need for legally protected medical leave, and/or aforesaid legally protected 13 activities (complaints/protests). 14 60. At alltimes relevant herein, Plaintiff believes and further alleges that Defendants Watts 15 Healthcare and/or its agents/representatives failed to timely, properly, and/or completely 16 investigate the retaliation Plaintiff was routinely subjected to and ratified and condoned the 17 unlawful behavior. 18 61. The acts and conduct of Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, as 19 aforesaid, were in violation of California Government Code §§ 12940 et seq. Said statutes 20 impose certain duties upon Defendants, and each of them, concerning retaliation against persons, 21 such as Plaintiff, on the basis of disabilities and the prohibition of actual/perceived disability 22 retaliation. Said statutes were intended to prevent the type of injury and damage herein set forth. 23 62. By the acts and conduct described above, Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, and each 24 of them, in violation of said statutes, knew about, or should have known about, and failed to 25 investigate and/or properly