Preview
1 JESSICA DAYTON (SBN:231698)
PAULA VIELMAN-REEVES (SBN: 286039)
2 ELISHA JUSSEN-COOKE (SBN: 283446)
ADZ LAW, LLP
3 2000 ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS, SUITE 161
SAN MATEO, CA 94403
4 JDAYTON@ADZLAW.COM
5 PVIELMAN-REEVES@ADZLAW.COM
EJUSSENCOOKE@ADZLAW.COM
6 PHONE: (650) 458-2300
FAX: (650) 458-2319
7
8 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
9
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA - COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
10
11 KATHERINE ROBERTS, ) CASE NO.
)
12 PLAINTIFF, ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES:
)
13 v. ) 1. NEGLIGENCE;
) 2. NEGLIGENT HIRING,
14 PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL ) RETENTION, AND
DISTRICT, and DOES 1-5, ) SUPERVISION;
15 ) 3. CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
DEFENDANTS. ) (VICARIOUS LIABILITY);
16 ) 4. SEXUAL HARASSMENT;
) 5. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA
17 ) RALPH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
) OF 1976; AND
18 ) 6. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION
) OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
19 ) (VICARIOUS LIABILITY).
)
20 ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
21
PLAINTIFF KATHERINE ROBERTS brings this action against DEFENDANTS
22
PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and DOES 1-5, inclusive, and alleges as
23
follows:
24
THE PARTIES
25
1. Plaintiff KATHERINE ROBERTS (“Plaintiff”) is an adult female, born in 1988.
26
Plaintiff is a resident of Contra Costa County, State of California. At all relevant times to the
27
alleged causes of action, Plaintiff was a resident of the County of Alameda, State of California.
28
-1-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Stephen Briggs (“Briggs”), who at all times material hereto was a teacher for the
2 PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (“DISTRICT”), sexually abused Plaintiff
3 within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1, beginning in or around 1999 when
4 Plaintiff was approximately 11 years old.
5 2. Plaintiff brings this complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1
6 for childhood sexual abuse suffered due to Defendants’ negligence and malfeasance. Pursuant
7 to California Government Code section 905(m), Plaintiff is specifically exempt from the claims
8 presentation requirements for her claims against Defendant DISTRICT. Plaintiff’s claims for
9 damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual abuse are timely, as they are filed within three
10 years of January 1, 2020.
11 3. Defendant DISTRICT is, and at all relevant times mentioned herein was, a public
12 school district for the State of California with its principal place of business in the State of
13 California, County of Alameda. At all relevant times, DISTRICT owned, operated, managed,
14 and/or controlled local schools throughout Alameda County, including Harvest Park Middle
15 School, where Briggs taught and sexually molested his students.
16 4. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants DOES 1-5 and
17 therefore sues such Defendants by fictitious names. Plaintiff alleges that each of the Defendants
18 named as Does 1-5 were in some manner negligent and/or otherwise responsible for the acts and
19 omissions herein alleged, and Plaintiff will seek leave of the Court to amend this Complaint
20 when their identities have been ascertained. Whenever a Defendant is the subject of any
21 charging allegation by Plaintiff, it shall be deemed that DOES 1-5, inclusive, and each of them,
22 are likewise subject to this charging allegation.
23 5. Defendants DISTRICT and DOES 1-5 are sometimes collectively referred to
24 herein as “Defendants” and/or “All Defendants”; such collective reference refers to all
25 specifically named Defendants.
26 6. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that at all times mentioned herein, each
27 Defendant was responsible in some manner or capacity for the occurrences herein alleged, and
28 that Plaintiff’s damages were proximately caused by all said Defendants.
-2-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 7. To the extent that any of the Defendants were a different entity, corporation, or
2 organization during the period of time when Briggs used his positions as a teacher to sexually
3 abuse Plaintiff, or was a successor thereto, such entity, corporation, or organization is hereby on
4 notice that it is intended to be a defendant in this lawsuit and is identified in the Complaint as
5 “DOE” defendant.
6 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7 8. This is a complaint for damages to compensate Plaintiff for tortious acts
8 committed against her by Defendants.
9 9. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants consistent with the
10 California and U.S. Constitutions because they are business entities and/or public education
11 institutions of the State of California, conduct substantial educational business activities in the
12 State of California, and the tortious acts occurred in California, rendering the exercise of
13 jurisdiction over Defendants by the California courts consistent with traditional notions of fair
14 play and substantial justice.
15 10. Venue is otherwise proper in this Court in that a substantial part of the events
16 giving rise to the claims pled herein occurred in Alameda County, Plaintiff seeks damages for
17 personal injuries committed primarily in Alameda County, and the alleged causes of action arose
18 in Alameda County. 0
19 FACTS APPLICABLE TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
20 11. Upon information and belief, during the 1999-2000 school year, Plaintiff was in
21 6th grade at Harvest Park Middle School, operated and controlled by DISTRICT, when Briggs,
22 her teacher, began sexually grooming and molesting Plaintiff. At the time, Plaintiff was
23 approximately 11 years old. Such conduct was done for Briggs’s sexual gratification and was
24 motivated by an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest in Plaintiff, who was a minor when Briggs
25 began abusing her, and thus unable to give valid, legal consent to such acts. Briggs’s molestation
26 of Plaintiff constituted conduct in violation of California Penal Code for annoying or molesting
27 a child under 18 years of age, and possibly other Penal Code provisions.
28 12. On information and belief, at all relevant times, Briggs was a paid employee of
-3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 DISTRICT.
2 13. DISTRICT employed Briggs as a teacher at Harvest Park Middle School at all
3 times material hereto. As such, Briggs was under and acted pursuant to the approval, direction,
4 control, and supervision of DISTRICT. At all relevant times, DISTRICT was responsible for
5 and did the recruitment, hiring, staffing, and supervising of employees and volunteers at Harvest
6 Park Middle School. At all relevant times, DISTRICT materially benefited from the operation
7 of Harvest Park Middle School, including the services of Briggs and the services of those who
8 supervised and managed Briggs.
9 14. Briggs’s employment duties and responsibilities with DISTRICT included, in
10 part, providing for the mentoring, advisory, educational, and emotional needs and well-being of
11 children at Harvest Park Middle School, including Plaintiff.
12 15. DISTRICT, through its agents, servants, and employees, held Briggs out to the
13 public, to Plaintiff, and to Plaintiff’s parents, as having been vetted, screened, and approved by
14 Defendants as someone who was safe and could be trusted with children.
15 16. Based on the representations of Defendant that Briggs was safe and trustworthy,
16 Plaintiff and her parents allowed her to be under the supervision of, and in the care, custody,
17 and control of Defendant, including when Briggs sexually abused Plaintiff.
18 17. During the time that Briggs was employed by Defendant, Briggs exploited his
19 position of authority and trust as a teacher, vested in him by Defendant, to sexually groom
20 Plaintiff, thereby gaining her trust and obtaining control over her in order to sexually abuse her,
21 including while Plaintiff was under the supervision of, and in the care, custody, or control of,
22 DISTRICT and Briggs.
23 18. Some of the sexual abuse of Plaintiff by Briggs occurred using the tasks, premises,
24 or instrumentalities that the Defendant entrusted to Briggs, and/or occurred during activities that
25 were sponsored by, or were a direct result of activities sponsored by, Defendant.
26 19. Briggs was Plaintiff’s teacher for her “quest” class, and other subjects as well.
27 Plaintiff attended Briggs’s class at least once per day. Briggs also served as Plaintiff’s advisor.
28 20. During lunch and break periods, Briggs would open his classroom for Plaintiff
-4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 and other students to come in for mentorship. Plaintiff often wanted to avoid the school’s
2 communal areas for fear of being teased and bullied. Briggs’s open classroom time became a
3 respite for her, a place where she thought she was safe and protected from the risk factors outside
4 of his classroom.
5 21. Slowly, Briggs gained Plaintiff’s trust, paying disproportionate attention to her.
6 He would dote on her, compliment her, probe her for intimate details of her life, and showered
7 her with physical affection. Like most children, Plaintiff was inexperienced with intimate
8 partner relationships and Briggs’s attention and affection made her feel unique. Plaintiff cannot
9 recall ever receiving education or resources regarding the prevention of sexual harassment or
10 abuse, and the reporting of such conduct, by Defendant. With no tools to help her assess the
11 dangers of such a situation, Plaintiff was ignorant to the signs of sexual grooming and its
12 dangers.
13 22. Briggs’s sexual abuse of Plaintiff was open and obvious on Defendant’s property.
14 23. As time went on, Briggs’s attention began turning physical. Briggs would often
15 find different ways to touch Plaintiff, “accidentally” brushing against her and touching her body
16 or touching her hair. He would look down her shirt when walking by her in class, compliment
17 her, and get close to her. The majority of these behaviors occurred while Plaintiff was on school
18 grounds, in plain sight of staff and administrators.
19 24. At one point, Briggs’s inappropriate attention and touching started making
20 Plaintiff feel uncomfortable. At some point during the 1999-2000 school year, prior to March
21 2000, Plaintiff reported the conduct to then-Principal Jim Hansen (Hansen). Plaintiff went into
22 Hansen’s office and told him that Briggs conduct was making her uneasy. Rather than take her
23 concerns seriously, Hansen brushed off Plaintiff’s complaints. Briggs was beloved by the school
24 community. His involvement in school athletics and other extracurricular activities allowed him
25 access to parents and other staff, which he exploited to gain trust and favor. Hansen was
26 seemingly no exception to Briggs’s charms. When Plaintiff reported to Hansen that Briggs’s
27 conduct made her uncomfortable, Hansen told Plaintiff that she was likely misinterpreting
28 Briggs’s gestures, and that Briggs was likely just expressing to her that she did a good job in an
-5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 affectionate matter. Plaintiff was made to believe that she was overreacting and that her
2 concerns were a product of her imagination.
3 25. In March 2000, during a school-sponsored trip to Disneyland, Plaintiff’s worst
4 fears about Briggs were confirmed. Briggs was a chaperone for that trip, along with a few other
5 parents. At one point, Briggs entered Plaintiff’s hotel room while she was alone. Briggs
6 proceeded to rape Plaintiff, having sexual intercourse with her while in the hotel room. Plaintiff
7 was approximately 11 years old at the time. After he raped her, Briggs told Plaintiff that she
8 could not tell anyone what happened. Briggs stressed to Plaintiff that if she told anyone, he
9 would deny it, and no one would believe her. Especially in light of how quickly Plaintiff was
10 rebuffed by Hansen, she believed him. Plaintiff did not report the rape to anyone that school
11 year. Although she was fearful that it could happen again, she also feared that she would be
12 ridiculed, attacked, or completely dismissed if she were to come forward. Plaintiff was silenced.
13 26. After 6th grade, in approximately 2000, Plaintiff transferred to a private school.
14 The decision to move to another school was partially due to the abuse she had endured.
15 27. In approximately 2021, Plaintiff found out that Briggs had been criminally
16 convicted in or around 2004 for sexually assaulting another student a couple years after he raped
17 her.
18 28. At all relevant times, Defendant, through its agents, servants, and employees,
19 knew or should have known that Briggs was a danger to children, in that he was likely to sexually
20 abuse them.
21 29. It was reasonably foreseeable to Defendant, through its agents, servants, and
22 employees, that Briggs’s sexual abuse of children would likely result to injuries to others,
23 including the sexual abuse of Plaintiff and other minor children entrusted to Defendant’s care.
24 30. During the period of abuse of Plaintiff at the hands of Briggs, Defendants had the
25 authority and the ability to obstruct or stop Briggs’s sexual molestation of Plaintiff and other
26 minor children, but negligently, recklessly, and/or willfully failed to do so, thereby allowing the
27 abuse to occur unabated.
28 31. By reason of the wrongful acts of Briggs and Defendants, as detailed herein,
-6-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Plaintiff sustained physical and psychological injuries, including but not limited to severe
2 emotional and psychological distress, humiliation, fright, dissociation, anger, depression,
3 anxiety, physical pain and mental anguish, and emotional and psychological damage. Plaintiff
4 suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome, which has led to physical symptoms, such as
5 night terrors and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. As a result of Briggs’s rape of her when
6 she was a child, Plaintiff sustained physical injuries to her pelvic floor and continues to suffer
7 from incontinence. The effects from this abuse have also manifested themselves in an inability
8 to focus, to have meaningful romantic relationships, and has had a negative impact on Plaintiff’s
9 ability to work and remain employed.
10 32. Some or all of the injuries described above are of a permanent and lasting nature,
11 and Plaintiff has and/or will become obligated to expend sums of money for treatment.
12 33. The sexual harassment, molestation, assault, and abuse of Plaintiff occurred as a
13 result not only of Briggs’s actions, but because of the actions and/or inactions of Defendants
14 and their employees, administrators and/or agents in failing to properly hire, train, and supervise
15 Briggs and in failing to prevent him from harming Plaintiff. At no time did Defendants take any
16 actions to restrict Briggs’s access to and/or interactions with minors, including Plaintiff, even
17 though Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs posed a risk of harm to Plaintiff.
18 Defendant’s conduct made it a virtual certainty that Plaintiff and other minors would be sexually
19 victimized.
20 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
21 NEGLIGENCE
22 (Against All Defendants)
23 34. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set
24 forth herein.
25 35. Plaintiff’s care, welfare, and/or physical custody was temporarily entrusted to
26 Defendants whenever Plaintiff attended school at Harvest Park Middle School and DISTRICT.
27 Defendants voluntarily accepted the care of Plaintiff by offering their programs to minors in the
28 Pleasanton community, under the care of Briggs. Defendants owed Plaintiff, and other minor
-7-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 children, a special duty of care, in addition to a duty of ordinary care, and owed Plaintiff the
2 higher duty of care than adults dealing with children owe to protect them from harm. Defendants
3 also owed a general duty of care to protect children against reasonably foreseeable perils due to
4 their lack of capacity to appreciate risks and avoid danger.
5 36. Defendants, by and through their employees, volunteers, agents, and servants
6 knew or reasonably should have known of Briggs’s dangerous and exploitive propensities and/or
7 that Briggs was an unfit employee to care for or supervise minor children. It was foreseeable
8 that if Defendants did not adequately exercise the duty of care owed to children in their care,
9 including but not limited to Plaintiff, the children entrusted to Defendants’ care would be
10 vulnerable to sexual abuse by Briggs.
11 37. Defendants breached their respective duties of care by holding out Briggs to
12 Plaintiff and her parents as being in good standing and trustworthy, by allowing Briggs to come
13 into contact with Plaintiff without supervision, by failing to adequately hire, supervise, or train
14 Briggs, who they permitted and enabled to have access to Briggs and other children, by failing
15 to investigate or otherwise confirm or deny such facts about Briggs, by failing to adequately
16 supervise the activities of Plaintiff and other children, and by failing to tell or concealing from
17 Plaintiff, her parents, the community, and/or law enforcement officials that Briggs was or may
18 have been sexually abusing minors.
19 38. Under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act (“CANRA”), Defendants, by
20 and through their employees and agents, were childcare custodians and thus had a statutory duty
21 to report known or suspected incidents of sexual harassment or abuse of minors to a child
22 protective agency pursuant to California Penal Code section 11166, and/or not to impede the
23 filing of any such report. On information and belief, Defendants knew or should have known
24 that Briggs, their agent and teacher, had sexually abused, harassed, or caused harm and other
25 injuries to minors, including Plaintiff, giving rise to a duty to report such conduct under the
26 CANRA. Defendants, by failing to report Briggs’s harassment and abuse, and by their
27 noncompliance with the mandated reporting requirements under the CANRA, created the risk
28 and danger contemplated by the CANRA, thereby unreasonably exposing Plaintiff and other
-8-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 minors to sexual harassment and abuse. Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose
2 protection the CANRA was adopted, and the harm resulting from Briggs’s sexual abuse and
3 harassment of Plaintiff was the type of occurrences and injuries that the CANRA was designed
4 to prevent. Had Defendants adequately reported the abuse and harassment of Plaintiff and other
5 minors as required by the CANRA, further harm to Plaintiff and other children would have been
6 avoided. By failing to follow the mandatory reporting requirements of the CANRA, Defendants
7 wrongfully denied Plaintiff and other minors the intervention of child protection services, which
8 reasonably would have changed the then-existing circumstances and conditions that allowed
9 Briggs the access and opportunity to continue sexually abusing and harassing Plaintiff and
10 others. Defendants’ failure to comply with the CANRA constituted a per se breach of their
11 duties to Plaintiff.
12 39. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has
13 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress,
14 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish,
15 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life.
16 40. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful
17 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including
18 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and
19 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy.
20 41. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to
21 be determined at trial.
22 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
23 NEGLIGENT HIRING, RETENTION, AND SUPERVISION
24 (Against All Defendants)
25 42. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set
26 forth herein.
27 43. During all relevant times, Defendants hired and retained Briggs as a paid
28 employee.
-9-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 44. Defendants had a duty of reasonable care in the hiring, training, retention, and
2 supervision of Briggs.
3 45. By providing programs for minors, where children are entrusted to the faculty
4 members, administrators, and/or teachers, Defendants expressly and impliedly represented that
5 these individuals, including Briggs, were not a sexual threat to children and others who would
6 fall under Briggs’s influence, control, direction, and guidance.
7 46. Briggs was unfit to perform the work for which Defendants hired him and did
8 sexually abuse and molest minor children in his care.
9 47. Defendants negligently failed to supervise Briggs in his position of trust and
10 authority as a coach and teacher, where he was able to commit wrongful acts against Plaintiff.
11 Defendants breached their duty of care in the hiring, retention, and/or supervision of Briggs,
12 who was unsafe and unfit to perform the work for which he was hired, namely to teach, coach,
13 and supervise minor children for Defendants.
14 48. Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs was unfit to be employed as
15 a coach, teacher and/or employee working in close proximity with minor children.
16 49. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has
17 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress,
18 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish,
19 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life.
20 50. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful
21 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including
22 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and
23 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy.
24 51. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to
25 be determined at trial.
26 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
27 CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE-VICARIOUS LIABILITY: CA CODE CIV. PRO. § 340.1
28 (Against All Defendants)
-10-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 52. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set
2 forth herein.
3 53. As set forth more fully herein, Briggs, through his authorized job duties for
4 Defendants, sexually groomed, harassed, assaulted, and abused Plaintiff, who was a minor at
5 the time, thereby engaging in conduct directed at Plaintiff that annoyed and/or molested her,
6 pursuant to Penal Code section 647.6. Briggs’s sexual misconduct was motivated by his
7 unnatural and/or abnormal sexual interest in Plaintiff, and in children in general, and disturbed,
8 irritated, offended, and/or injured Plaintiff, as they would unhesitatingly disturb, irritate, offend,
9 and/or injure a reasonable person.
10 54. Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs, their agent, had sexually
11 abused minors, including Plaintiff. The danger that Briggs would molest other minors in
12 Defendants’ care, custody, and control was reasonably foreseeable. Defendants nevertheless
13 failed to supervise and retained Briggs, resulting in injury to Plaintiff.
14 55. Defendants are vicariously liable for Briggs’s sexual abuse of Plaintiff because
15 Defendants ratified and/or approved his conduct, or Briggs was aided in his abuse of Plaintiff
16 by his agency relationship with Defendants. A principal may be liable for an agent’s act where
17 the employer subsequently ratified an originally unauthorized tort. (C.R. v. Tenet Healthcare
18 Corp. (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1094, 1110.) This theory generally applies “where an employer
19 fails to investigate or respond to charges that an employee committed an intentional tort, such
20 as assault or battery.” (Id. at 1110.) Retention of an employee after knowledge of the
21 employee’s conduct or an adequate opportunity to learn of the conduct may support a finding of
22 ratification. (Murillo v. Rite Stuff Foods, Inc. (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 833, 852.) Covering-up
23 evidence of the employee’s misconduct can also demonstrate ratification of that conduct. (See
24 Greenfield v. Spectrum Investment Corporation (1985) 174 Cal.App.3d 111, 120.)
25 Furthermore, ratification is a question of fact, not law. (Ventura v. ABM Industries (2012) 212
26 Cal.App.4th 258, 272.)
27 56. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has
28 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress,
-11-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish,
2 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life.
3 57. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful
4 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including
5 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and
6 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy.
7 58. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to
8 be determined at trial.
9 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
10 SEXUAL HARASSMENT
11 (Against All Defendants)
12 59. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set
13 forth herein.
14 60. Pursuant to the California Education Code, all students have the right to participate
15 fully in the education process, free from discrimination and harassment. (Cal. Edu. Code §
16 201(a).) Moreover, California’s public schools must take affirmative steps to “combat racism,
17 sexism, and other forms of bias.” (Cal. Edu. Code § 201(b).) Education Code section 220
18 provides that “[n]o person shall be subjected to discrimination on the basis of … gender… in
19 any program or activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from,
20 state financial assistance.”
21 61. While Plaintiff was a student at DISTRICT, Plaintiff suffered harassment that was
22 so severe, pervasive, and offensive that it effectively deprived Plaintiff of her right of equal
23 access to educational benefits and opportunities. This harassment included, but was not limited
24 to Briggs’s sexual advances, solicitations, requests, and demands for sexual compliance of a
25 hostile nature based on Plaintiff’s gender that were unwelcome, pervasive, and severe.
26 62. The incidents of abuse and harassment outlined herein took place while Plaintiff
27 was under the control of Briggs and Defendants, and in Briggs’s capacity as an agent on behalf
28 of Defendants.
-12-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 63. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has
2 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress,
3 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish,
4 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life.
5 64. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful
6 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including
7 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and
8 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy.
9 65. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to
10 be determined at trial.
11 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
12 VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA RALPH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1976: CAL.
13 CIV. CODE § 51.7
14 (Against All Defendants)
15 66. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
16 forth herein.
17 67. Pursuant to the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976, Civil Code section 51.7, all
18 persons in California have the right to be safe from violence or threats of violence committed
19 against them because of certain characteristics, including sex and gender.
20 68. Defendants violated the Ralph Civil Rights Act through violence, or intimidation
21 by threat of violence, that was committed against Plaintiff based on her sex and gender. As
22 described herein, Briggs, as an agent of Defendants, intentionally, recklessly, and wantonly
23 sexually abused Plaintiff.
24 69. Pursuant to Civil Code section 52, subsection (b), Defendants are liable for aiding,
25 inciting, or conspiring to deny Plaintiff the rights guaranteed by Civil Code section 51.7.
26 70. Defendants aided and abetted Briggs’s crimes and sexual misconduct against
27 Plaintiff. Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs was likely to sexually abuse
28 Plaintiff. Despite this, Defendants knowingly, intentionally, deliberately, willfully, and/or
-13-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 recklessly disregarded information regarding Briggs’s sexual violence against minor females,
2 taking no action to investigate, supervise, or monitor Briggs to ensure the safety of Plaintiff and
3 other children. As such, Defendants fostered and facilitated the environment and impunity
4 Briggs needed to sexually abuse Plaintiff and minor females who had been entrusted into their
5 care, custody, and control.
6 71. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has
7 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress,
8 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish,
9 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life.
10 72. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendant’s aforementioned wrongful
11 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including
12 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and
13 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy.
14 73. Plaintiff is also entitled to statutory damages pursuant to Civil Code section 52,
15 subdivision (b).
16 74. Pursuant to Civil code sections 51.7 and 52, Plaintiff seeks actual damages
17 (special and general damages), attorney’s fees and costs, and civil penalties ($25,000 each).
18 75. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to
19 be determined at trial.
20 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
21 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS-
22 VICARIOUS LIABILITY
23 (Against All Defendants)
24 76. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
25 forth herein.
26 77. Briggs, through his authorized job duties for Defendants, engaged in conduct
27 toward Plaintiff that was extreme and outrageous so as to exceed the bounds of decency in a
28 civilized society. Namely, he caused Plaintiff to experience mental suffering by sexually
-14-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 harassing, assaulting, and molesting her. Plaintiff had great trust, faith, and confidence in Briggs
2 and in Defendants, which, by virtue of Briggs and Defendant’s wrongful conduct, turned to fear.
3 78. Defendants are liable for the actions of their agents and employees directly and
4 under the doctrines of respondeat superior and ratification.
5 79. Defendants are vicariously liable for Briggs’s sexual molestation of Plaintiff
6 because Defendants ratified and/or approved of his conduct, or Briggs was aided in his sexual
7 abuse of Plaintiff by his agency relationship with Defendants.
8 80. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has
9 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress,
10 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish,
11 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life.
12 81. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful
13 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including
14 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and
15 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy.
16 82. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to
17 be determined at trial.
18 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
19 83. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, as alleged
20 herein, Plaintiff has sustained injuries in the form of great mental and emotional pain and
21 suffering. As a result, Plaintiff has sustained general damages.
22 84. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions as herein alleged,
23 Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur economic damages, including loss of income,
24 past and future medical bills, therapy bills, and related expenses and attorney’s fees all to her
25 special damages.
26 85. Defendants’ actions have caused Plaintiff to incur attorneys’ fees to bring the
27 present action.
28 86. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment
-15-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 against Defendants as follows for the above listed causes of action:
2 a. For general damages according to proof;
3 b. For special damages according to proof;
4 c. For damages pursuant to Cal. Civ. Code section 52;
5 d. For attorney’s fees incurred herein;
6 e. For costs of suit incurred herein;
7 f. For an award of interest, including prejudgment interest, at a legal rate; and
8 g. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.
9
10 DATED: December 30, 2022 ADZ LAW, LLP
11
12
__________________________________
13 JESSICA DAYTON, Attorney for Plaintiff
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-16-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Preview
1 JESSICA DAYTON (SBN:231698) PAULA VIELMAN-REEVES (SBN: 286039) 2 ELISHA JUSSEN-COOKE (SBN: 283446) ADZ LAW, LLP 3 2000 ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS, SUITE 161 SAN MATEO, CA 94403 4 JDAYTON@ADZLAW.COM 5 PVIELMAN-REEVES@ADZLAW.COM EJUSSENCOOKE@ADZLAW.COM 6 PHONE: (650) 458-2300 FAX: (650) 458-2319 7 8 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA - COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 10 11 KATHERINE ROBERTS, ) CASE NO. ) 12 PLAINTIFF, ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: ) 13 v. ) 1. NEGLIGENCE; ) 2. NEGLIGENT HIRING, 14 PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL ) RETENTION, AND DISTRICT, and DOES 1-5, ) SUPERVISION; 15 ) 3. CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE DEFENDANTS. ) (VICARIOUS LIABILITY); 16 ) 4. SEXUAL HARASSMENT; ) 5. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA 17 ) RALPH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT ) OF 1976; AND 18 ) 6. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION ) OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 19 ) (VICARIOUS LIABILITY). ) 20 ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 21 PLAINTIFF KATHERINE ROBERTS brings this action against DEFENDANTS 22 PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and DOES 1-5, inclusive, and alleges as 23 follows: 24 THE PARTIES 25 1. Plaintiff KATHERINE ROBERTS (“Plaintiff”) is an adult female, born in 1988. 26 Plaintiff is a resident of Contra Costa County, State of California. At all relevant times to the 27 alleged causes of action, Plaintiff was a resident of the County of Alameda, State of California. 28 -1- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Stephen Briggs (“Briggs”), who at all times material hereto was a teacher for the 2 PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (“DISTRICT”), sexually abused Plaintiff 3 within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1, beginning in or around 1999 when 4 Plaintiff was approximately 11 years old. 5 2. Plaintiff brings this complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1 6 for childhood sexual abuse suffered due to Defendants’ negligence and malfeasance. Pursuant 7 to California Government Code section 905(m), Plaintiff is specifically exempt from the claims 8 presentation requirements for her claims against Defendant DISTRICT. Plaintiff’s claims for 9 damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual abuse are timely, as they are filed within three 10 years of January 1, 2020. 11 3. Defendant DISTRICT is, and at all relevant times mentioned herein was, a public 12 school district for the State of California with its principal place of business in the State of 13 California, County of Alameda. At all relevant times, DISTRICT owned, operated, managed, 14 and/or controlled local schools throughout Alameda County, including Harvest Park Middle 15 School, where Briggs taught and sexually molested his students. 16 4. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants DOES 1-5 and 17 therefore sues such Defendants by fictitious names. Plaintiff alleges that each of the Defendants 18 named as Does 1-5 were in some manner negligent and/or otherwise responsible for the acts and 19 omissions herein alleged, and Plaintiff will seek leave of the Court to amend this Complaint 20 when their identities have been ascertained. Whenever a Defendant is the subject of any 21 charging allegation by Plaintiff, it shall be deemed that DOES 1-5, inclusive, and each of them, 22 are likewise subject to this charging allegation. 23 5. Defendants DISTRICT and DOES 1-5 are sometimes collectively referred to 24 herein as “Defendants” and/or “All Defendants”; such collective reference refers to all 25 specifically named Defendants. 26 6. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that at all times mentioned herein, each 27 Defendant was responsible in some manner or capacity for the occurrences herein alleged, and 28 that Plaintiff’s damages were proximately caused by all said Defendants. -2- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 7. To the extent that any of the Defendants were a different entity, corporation, or 2 organization during the period of time when Briggs used his positions as a teacher to sexually 3 abuse Plaintiff, or was a successor thereto, such entity, corporation, or organization is hereby on 4 notice that it is intended to be a defendant in this lawsuit and is identified in the Complaint as 5 “DOE” defendant. 6 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 7 8. This is a complaint for damages to compensate Plaintiff for tortious acts 8 committed against her by Defendants. 9 9. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants consistent with the 10 California and U.S. Constitutions because they are business entities and/or public education 11 institutions of the State of California, conduct substantial educational business activities in the 12 State of California, and the tortious acts occurred in California, rendering the exercise of 13 jurisdiction over Defendants by the California courts consistent with traditional notions of fair 14 play and substantial justice. 15 10. Venue is otherwise proper in this Court in that a substantial part of the events 16 giving rise to the claims pled herein occurred in Alameda County, Plaintiff seeks damages for 17 personal injuries committed primarily in Alameda County, and the alleged causes of action arose 18 in Alameda County. 0 19 FACTS APPLICABLE TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION 20 11. Upon information and belief, during the 1999-2000 school year, Plaintiff was in 21 6th grade at Harvest Park Middle School, operated and controlled by DISTRICT, when Briggs, 22 her teacher, began sexually grooming and molesting Plaintiff. At the time, Plaintiff was 23 approximately 11 years old. Such conduct was done for Briggs’s sexual gratification and was 24 motivated by an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest in Plaintiff, who was a minor when Briggs 25 began abusing her, and thus unable to give valid, legal consent to such acts. Briggs’s molestation 26 of Plaintiff constituted conduct in violation of California Penal Code for annoying or molesting 27 a child under 18 years of age, and possibly other Penal Code provisions. 28 12. On information and belief, at all relevant times, Briggs was a paid employee of -3- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 DISTRICT. 2 13. DISTRICT employed Briggs as a teacher at Harvest Park Middle School at all 3 times material hereto. As such, Briggs was under and acted pursuant to the approval, direction, 4 control, and supervision of DISTRICT. At all relevant times, DISTRICT was responsible for 5 and did the recruitment, hiring, staffing, and supervising of employees and volunteers at Harvest 6 Park Middle School. At all relevant times, DISTRICT materially benefited from the operation 7 of Harvest Park Middle School, including the services of Briggs and the services of those who 8 supervised and managed Briggs. 9 14. Briggs’s employment duties and responsibilities with DISTRICT included, in 10 part, providing for the mentoring, advisory, educational, and emotional needs and well-being of 11 children at Harvest Park Middle School, including Plaintiff. 12 15. DISTRICT, through its agents, servants, and employees, held Briggs out to the 13 public, to Plaintiff, and to Plaintiff’s parents, as having been vetted, screened, and approved by 14 Defendants as someone who was safe and could be trusted with children. 15 16. Based on the representations of Defendant that Briggs was safe and trustworthy, 16 Plaintiff and her parents allowed her to be under the supervision of, and in the care, custody, 17 and control of Defendant, including when Briggs sexually abused Plaintiff. 18 17. During the time that Briggs was employed by Defendant, Briggs exploited his 19 position of authority and trust as a teacher, vested in him by Defendant, to sexually groom 20 Plaintiff, thereby gaining her trust and obtaining control over her in order to sexually abuse her, 21 including while Plaintiff was under the supervision of, and in the care, custody, or control of, 22 DISTRICT and Briggs. 23 18. Some of the sexual abuse of Plaintiff by Briggs occurred using the tasks, premises, 24 or instrumentalities that the Defendant entrusted to Briggs, and/or occurred during activities that 25 were sponsored by, or were a direct result of activities sponsored by, Defendant. 26 19. Briggs was Plaintiff’s teacher for her “quest” class, and other subjects as well. 27 Plaintiff attended Briggs’s class at least once per day. Briggs also served as Plaintiff’s advisor. 28 20. During lunch and break periods, Briggs would open his classroom for Plaintiff -4- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 and other students to come in for mentorship. Plaintiff often wanted to avoid the school’s 2 communal areas for fear of being teased and bullied. Briggs’s open classroom time became a 3 respite for her, a place where she thought she was safe and protected from the risk factors outside 4 of his classroom. 5 21. Slowly, Briggs gained Plaintiff’s trust, paying disproportionate attention to her. 6 He would dote on her, compliment her, probe her for intimate details of her life, and showered 7 her with physical affection. Like most children, Plaintiff was inexperienced with intimate 8 partner relationships and Briggs’s attention and affection made her feel unique. Plaintiff cannot 9 recall ever receiving education or resources regarding the prevention of sexual harassment or 10 abuse, and the reporting of such conduct, by Defendant. With no tools to help her assess the 11 dangers of such a situation, Plaintiff was ignorant to the signs of sexual grooming and its 12 dangers. 13 22. Briggs’s sexual abuse of Plaintiff was open and obvious on Defendant’s property. 14 23. As time went on, Briggs’s attention began turning physical. Briggs would often 15 find different ways to touch Plaintiff, “accidentally” brushing against her and touching her body 16 or touching her hair. He would look down her shirt when walking by her in class, compliment 17 her, and get close to her. The majority of these behaviors occurred while Plaintiff was on school 18 grounds, in plain sight of staff and administrators. 19 24. At one point, Briggs’s inappropriate attention and touching started making 20 Plaintiff feel uncomfortable. At some point during the 1999-2000 school year, prior to March 21 2000, Plaintiff reported the conduct to then-Principal Jim Hansen (Hansen). Plaintiff went into 22 Hansen’s office and told him that Briggs conduct was making her uneasy. Rather than take her 23 concerns seriously, Hansen brushed off Plaintiff’s complaints. Briggs was beloved by the school 24 community. His involvement in school athletics and other extracurricular activities allowed him 25 access to parents and other staff, which he exploited to gain trust and favor. Hansen was 26 seemingly no exception to Briggs’s charms. When Plaintiff reported to Hansen that Briggs’s 27 conduct made her uncomfortable, Hansen told Plaintiff that she was likely misinterpreting 28 Briggs’s gestures, and that Briggs was likely just expressing to her that she did a good job in an -5- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 affectionate matter. Plaintiff was made to believe that she was overreacting and that her 2 concerns were a product of her imagination. 3 25. In March 2000, during a school-sponsored trip to Disneyland, Plaintiff’s worst 4 fears about Briggs were confirmed. Briggs was a chaperone for that trip, along with a few other 5 parents. At one point, Briggs entered Plaintiff’s hotel room while she was alone. Briggs 6 proceeded to rape Plaintiff, having sexual intercourse with her while in the hotel room. Plaintiff 7 was approximately 11 years old at the time. After he raped her, Briggs told Plaintiff that she 8 could not tell anyone what happened. Briggs stressed to Plaintiff that if she told anyone, he 9 would deny it, and no one would believe her. Especially in light of how quickly Plaintiff was 10 rebuffed by Hansen, she believed him. Plaintiff did not report the rape to anyone that school 11 year. Although she was fearful that it could happen again, she also feared that she would be 12 ridiculed, attacked, or completely dismissed if she were to come forward. Plaintiff was silenced. 13 26. After 6th grade, in approximately 2000, Plaintiff transferred to a private school. 14 The decision to move to another school was partially due to the abuse she had endured. 15 27. In approximately 2021, Plaintiff found out that Briggs had been criminally 16 convicted in or around 2004 for sexually assaulting another student a couple years after he raped 17 her. 18 28. At all relevant times, Defendant, through its agents, servants, and employees, 19 knew or should have known that Briggs was a danger to children, in that he was likely to sexually 20 abuse them. 21 29. It was reasonably foreseeable to Defendant, through its agents, servants, and 22 employees, that Briggs’s sexual abuse of children would likely result to injuries to others, 23 including the sexual abuse of Plaintiff and other minor children entrusted to Defendant’s care. 24 30. During the period of abuse of Plaintiff at the hands of Briggs, Defendants had the 25 authority and the ability to obstruct or stop Briggs’s sexual molestation of Plaintiff and other 26 minor children, but negligently, recklessly, and/or willfully failed to do so, thereby allowing the 27 abuse to occur unabated. 28 31. By reason of the wrongful acts of Briggs and Defendants, as detailed herein, -6- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Plaintiff sustained physical and psychological injuries, including but not limited to severe 2 emotional and psychological distress, humiliation, fright, dissociation, anger, depression, 3 anxiety, physical pain and mental anguish, and emotional and psychological damage. Plaintiff 4 suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome, which has led to physical symptoms, such as 5 night terrors and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. As a result of Briggs’s rape of her when 6 she was a child, Plaintiff sustained physical injuries to her pelvic floor and continues to suffer 7 from incontinence. The effects from this abuse have also manifested themselves in an inability 8 to focus, to have meaningful romantic relationships, and has had a negative impact on Plaintiff’s 9 ability to work and remain employed. 10 32. Some or all of the injuries described above are of a permanent and lasting nature, 11 and Plaintiff has and/or will become obligated to expend sums of money for treatment. 12 33. The sexual harassment, molestation, assault, and abuse of Plaintiff occurred as a 13 result not only of Briggs’s actions, but because of the actions and/or inactions of Defendants 14 and their employees, administrators and/or agents in failing to properly hire, train, and supervise 15 Briggs and in failing to prevent him from harming Plaintiff. At no time did Defendants take any 16 actions to restrict Briggs’s access to and/or interactions with minors, including Plaintiff, even 17 though Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs posed a risk of harm to Plaintiff. 18 Defendant’s conduct made it a virtual certainty that Plaintiff and other minors would be sexually 19 victimized. 20 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 21 NEGLIGENCE 22 (Against All Defendants) 23 34. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set 24 forth herein. 25 35. Plaintiff’s care, welfare, and/or physical custody was temporarily entrusted to 26 Defendants whenever Plaintiff attended school at Harvest Park Middle School and DISTRICT. 27 Defendants voluntarily accepted the care of Plaintiff by offering their programs to minors in the 28 Pleasanton community, under the care of Briggs. Defendants owed Plaintiff, and other minor -7- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 children, a special duty of care, in addition to a duty of ordinary care, and owed Plaintiff the 2 higher duty of care than adults dealing with children owe to protect them from harm. Defendants 3 also owed a general duty of care to protect children against reasonably foreseeable perils due to 4 their lack of capacity to appreciate risks and avoid danger. 5 36. Defendants, by and through their employees, volunteers, agents, and servants 6 knew or reasonably should have known of Briggs’s dangerous and exploitive propensities and/or 7 that Briggs was an unfit employee to care for or supervise minor children. It was foreseeable 8 that if Defendants did not adequately exercise the duty of care owed to children in their care, 9 including but not limited to Plaintiff, the children entrusted to Defendants’ care would be 10 vulnerable to sexual abuse by Briggs. 11 37. Defendants breached their respective duties of care by holding out Briggs to 12 Plaintiff and her parents as being in good standing and trustworthy, by allowing Briggs to come 13 into contact with Plaintiff without supervision, by failing to adequately hire, supervise, or train 14 Briggs, who they permitted and enabled to have access to Briggs and other children, by failing 15 to investigate or otherwise confirm or deny such facts about Briggs, by failing to adequately 16 supervise the activities of Plaintiff and other children, and by failing to tell or concealing from 17 Plaintiff, her parents, the community, and/or law enforcement officials that Briggs was or may 18 have been sexually abusing minors. 19 38. Under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act (“CANRA”), Defendants, by 20 and through their employees and agents, were childcare custodians and thus had a statutory duty 21 to report known or suspected incidents of sexual harassment or abuse of minors to a child 22 protective agency pursuant to California Penal Code section 11166, and/or not to impede the 23 filing of any such report. On information and belief, Defendants knew or should have known 24 that Briggs, their agent and teacher, had sexually abused, harassed, or caused harm and other 25 injuries to minors, including Plaintiff, giving rise to a duty to report such conduct under the 26 CANRA. Defendants, by failing to report Briggs’s harassment and abuse, and by their 27 noncompliance with the mandated reporting requirements under the CANRA, created the risk 28 and danger contemplated by the CANRA, thereby unreasonably exposing Plaintiff and other -8- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 minors to sexual harassment and abuse. Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose 2 protection the CANRA was adopted, and the harm resulting from Briggs’s sexual abuse and 3 harassment of Plaintiff was the type of occurrences and injuries that the CANRA was designed 4 to prevent. Had Defendants adequately reported the abuse and harassment of Plaintiff and other 5 minors as required by the CANRA, further harm to Plaintiff and other children would have been 6 avoided. By failing to follow the mandatory reporting requirements of the CANRA, Defendants 7 wrongfully denied Plaintiff and other minors the intervention of child protection services, which 8 reasonably would have changed the then-existing circumstances and conditions that allowed 9 Briggs the access and opportunity to continue sexually abusing and harassing Plaintiff and 10 others. Defendants’ failure to comply with the CANRA constituted a per se breach of their 11 duties to Plaintiff. 12 39. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has 13 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress, 14 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish, 15 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life. 16 40. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful 17 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including 18 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and 19 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy. 20 41. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to 21 be determined at trial. 22 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 23 NEGLIGENT HIRING, RETENTION, AND SUPERVISION 24 (Against All Defendants) 25 42. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set 26 forth herein. 27 43. During all relevant times, Defendants hired and retained Briggs as a paid 28 employee. -9- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 44. Defendants had a duty of reasonable care in the hiring, training, retention, and 2 supervision of Briggs. 3 45. By providing programs for minors, where children are entrusted to the faculty 4 members, administrators, and/or teachers, Defendants expressly and impliedly represented that 5 these individuals, including Briggs, were not a sexual threat to children and others who would 6 fall under Briggs’s influence, control, direction, and guidance. 7 46. Briggs was unfit to perform the work for which Defendants hired him and did 8 sexually abuse and molest minor children in his care. 9 47. Defendants negligently failed to supervise Briggs in his position of trust and 10 authority as a coach and teacher, where he was able to commit wrongful acts against Plaintiff. 11 Defendants breached their duty of care in the hiring, retention, and/or supervision of Briggs, 12 who was unsafe and unfit to perform the work for which he was hired, namely to teach, coach, 13 and supervise minor children for Defendants. 14 48. Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs was unfit to be employed as 15 a coach, teacher and/or employee working in close proximity with minor children. 16 49. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has 17 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress, 18 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish, 19 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life. 20 50. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful 21 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including 22 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and 23 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy. 24 51. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to 25 be determined at trial. 26 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 27 CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE-VICARIOUS LIABILITY: CA CODE CIV. PRO. § 340.1 28 (Against All Defendants) -10- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 52. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set 2 forth herein. 3 53. As set forth more fully herein, Briggs, through his authorized job duties for 4 Defendants, sexually groomed, harassed, assaulted, and abused Plaintiff, who was a minor at 5 the time, thereby engaging in conduct directed at Plaintiff that annoyed and/or molested her, 6 pursuant to Penal Code section 647.6. Briggs’s sexual misconduct was motivated by his 7 unnatural and/or abnormal sexual interest in Plaintiff, and in children in general, and disturbed, 8 irritated, offended, and/or injured Plaintiff, as they would unhesitatingly disturb, irritate, offend, 9 and/or injure a reasonable person. 10 54. Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs, their agent, had sexually 11 abused minors, including Plaintiff. The danger that Briggs would molest other minors in 12 Defendants’ care, custody, and control was reasonably foreseeable. Defendants nevertheless 13 failed to supervise and retained Briggs, resulting in injury to Plaintiff. 14 55. Defendants are vicariously liable for Briggs’s sexual abuse of Plaintiff because 15 Defendants ratified and/or approved his conduct, or Briggs was aided in his abuse of Plaintiff 16 by his agency relationship with Defendants. A principal may be liable for an agent’s act where 17 the employer subsequently ratified an originally unauthorized tort. (C.R. v. Tenet Healthcare 18 Corp. (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1094, 1110.) This theory generally applies “where an employer 19 fails to investigate or respond to charges that an employee committed an intentional tort, such 20 as assault or battery.” (Id. at 1110.) Retention of an employee after knowledge of the 21 employee’s conduct or an adequate opportunity to learn of the conduct may support a finding of 22 ratification. (Murillo v. Rite Stuff Foods, Inc. (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 833, 852.) Covering-up 23 evidence of the employee’s misconduct can also demonstrate ratification of that conduct. (See 24 Greenfield v. Spectrum Investment Corporation (1985) 174 Cal.App.3d 111, 120.) 25 Furthermore, ratification is a question of fact, not law. (Ventura v. ABM Industries (2012) 212 26 Cal.App.4th 258, 272.) 27 56. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has 28 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress, -11- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish, 2 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life. 3 57. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful 4 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including 5 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and 6 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy. 7 58. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to 8 be determined at trial. 9 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 10 SEXUAL HARASSMENT 11 (Against All Defendants) 12 59. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the proceeding paragraphs as if fully set 13 forth herein. 14 60. Pursuant to the California Education Code, all students have the right to participate 15 fully in the education process, free from discrimination and harassment. (Cal. Edu. Code § 16 201(a).) Moreover, California’s public schools must take affirmative steps to “combat racism, 17 sexism, and other forms of bias.” (Cal. Edu. Code § 201(b).) Education Code section 220 18 provides that “[n]o person shall be subjected to discrimination on the basis of … gender… in 19 any program or activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from, 20 state financial assistance.” 21 61. While Plaintiff was a student at DISTRICT, Plaintiff suffered harassment that was 22 so severe, pervasive, and offensive that it effectively deprived Plaintiff of her right of equal 23 access to educational benefits and opportunities. This harassment included, but was not limited 24 to Briggs’s sexual advances, solicitations, requests, and demands for sexual compliance of a 25 hostile nature based on Plaintiff’s gender that were unwelcome, pervasive, and severe. 26 62. The incidents of abuse and harassment outlined herein took place while Plaintiff 27 was under the control of Briggs and Defendants, and in Briggs’s capacity as an agent on behalf 28 of Defendants. -12- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 63. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has 2 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress, 3 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish, 4 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life. 5 64. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful 6 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including 7 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and 8 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy. 9 65. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to 10 be determined at trial. 11 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 12 VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA RALPH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1976: CAL. 13 CIV. CODE § 51.7 14 (Against All Defendants) 15 66. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set 16 forth herein. 17 67. Pursuant to the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976, Civil Code section 51.7, all 18 persons in California have the right to be safe from violence or threats of violence committed 19 against them because of certain characteristics, including sex and gender. 20 68. Defendants violated the Ralph Civil Rights Act through violence, or intimidation 21 by threat of violence, that was committed against Plaintiff based on her sex and gender. As 22 described herein, Briggs, as an agent of Defendants, intentionally, recklessly, and wantonly 23 sexually abused Plaintiff. 24 69. Pursuant to Civil Code section 52, subsection (b), Defendants are liable for aiding, 25 inciting, or conspiring to deny Plaintiff the rights guaranteed by Civil Code section 51.7. 26 70. Defendants aided and abetted Briggs’s crimes and sexual misconduct against 27 Plaintiff. Defendants knew or should have known that Briggs was likely to sexually abuse 28 Plaintiff. Despite this, Defendants knowingly, intentionally, deliberately, willfully, and/or -13- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 recklessly disregarded information regarding Briggs’s sexual violence against minor females, 2 taking no action to investigate, supervise, or monitor Briggs to ensure the safety of Plaintiff and 3 other children. As such, Defendants fostered and facilitated the environment and impunity 4 Briggs needed to sexually abuse Plaintiff and minor females who had been entrusted into their 5 care, custody, and control. 6 71. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has 7 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress, 8 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish, 9 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life. 10 72. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendant’s aforementioned wrongful 11 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including 12 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and 13 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy. 14 73. Plaintiff is also entitled to statutory damages pursuant to Civil Code section 52, 15 subdivision (b). 16 74. Pursuant to Civil code sections 51.7 and 52, Plaintiff seeks actual damages 17 (special and general damages), attorney’s fees and costs, and civil penalties ($25,000 each). 18 75. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to 19 be determined at trial. 20 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 21 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS- 22 VICARIOUS LIABILITY 23 (Against All Defendants) 24 76. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set 25 forth herein. 26 77. Briggs, through his authorized job duties for Defendants, engaged in conduct 27 toward Plaintiff that was extreme and outrageous so as to exceed the bounds of decency in a 28 civilized society. Namely, he caused Plaintiff to experience mental suffering by sexually -14- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 harassing, assaulting, and molesting her. Plaintiff had great trust, faith, and confidence in Briggs 2 and in Defendants, which, by virtue of Briggs and Defendant’s wrongful conduct, turned to fear. 3 78. Defendants are liable for the actions of their agents and employees directly and 4 under the doctrines of respondeat superior and ratification. 5 79. Defendants are vicariously liable for Briggs’s sexual molestation of Plaintiff 6 because Defendants ratified and/or approved of his conduct, or Briggs was aided in his sexual 7 abuse of Plaintiff by his agency relationship with Defendants. 8 80. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff has 9 sustained and will sustain pain and suffering, serious psychological and emotional distress, 10 physical manifestations of psychological and emotional distress, mental anguish, 11 embarrassment and humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of enjoyment of life. 12 81. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned wrongful 13 conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur economic damages, including 14 loss of earnings and earning capacity, and past and future expenses for medical and 15 psychological treatment, counseling, and therapy. 16 82. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendants in an amount to 17 be determined at trial. 18 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 19 83. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, as alleged 20 herein, Plaintiff has sustained injuries in the form of great mental and emotional pain and 21 suffering. As a result, Plaintiff has sustained general damages. 22 84. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions as herein alleged, 23 Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur economic damages, including loss of income, 24 past and future medical bills, therapy bills, and related expenses and attorney’s fees all to her 25 special damages. 26 85. Defendants’ actions have caused Plaintiff to incur attorneys’ fees to bring the 27 present action. 28 86. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment -15- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 against Defendants as follows for the above listed causes of action: 2 a. For general damages according to proof; 3 b. For special damages according to proof; 4 c. For damages pursuant to Cal. Civ. Code section 52; 5 d. For attorney’s fees incurred herein; 6 e. For costs of suit incurred herein; 7 f. For an award of interest, including prejudgment interest, at a legal rate; and 8 g. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper. 9 10 DATED: December 30, 2022 ADZ LAW, LLP 11 12 __________________________________ 13 JESSICA DAYTON, Attorney for Plaintiff 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -16- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES