Preview
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
1 Superior Court of California
Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda (SBN 249085) County of Santa Barbara
2 EDWARDS & DE LA CERDA, PLLC Darrel E. Parker, Executive Officer
3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1100 5/15/2023 3:29 PM
3 Dallas, TX 75219 By: Terri Chavez , Deputy
P: 214.550.5239
4 F: 214.722.2101
5 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
6
7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
8 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
9
10 JOHN DOE CLG03277, Case No.: 22CV05053
Judge: Hon. Thomas P. Anderle
11 Plaintiff, Department: 3
12 vs. STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT
13 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, a business entity of form Date Filed: December 22, 2022
14 unknown; and DOES 1-500, Trial Date: February 28, 2024
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
COME NOW, Plaintiff JOHN DOE CLG03277 (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant
19
CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (“Defendant”) and hereby stipulate as follows:
20
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the original Complaint on December 22, 2022;
21
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint on March 14, 2023, adding the
22
true name of Defendant pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 340.1;
23
WHEREAS, Plaintiff served Defendant with the First Amended Complaint on March 15,
24
2023;
25
WHEREAS, as a result of the parties’ meet-and-confer as to the allegations in the First
26
Amended Complaint, Plaintiff has agreed to file a Second Amended Complaint removing certain
27
allegations in exchange for Defendant’s agreement to file an answer to the Second Amended
28
1
STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 Complaint;
2 NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant hereby stipulate that:
3 1. Plaintiff may file a Second Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached
4 hereto as Exhibit “A”; and
5 2. Defendant shall have until May 31, 2023 to file an answer to the Second
6 Amended Complaint.
7
Dated: May 15, 2023 EDWARDS & DE LA CERDA, PLLC
8
9 By:
Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda (SBN 249085)
10 Edwards & de la Cerda, PLLC
3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1100
11 Dallas, TX 75219
P: 214.550.5239
12 F: 214.722.2101
peter@edwardsdelacerda.com
13
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
14
15
16 Dated: May 11, 2023 GRIFFITH & THORNBURGH, LLP
17
18
By: _______________________________
19 John C. Eck
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 John Doe CLG03277 v. Carpinteria Unified School District, et al.; Case No. 22CV05053
3 I, Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda, state:
4 My business address is 3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1110 Dallas, Texas 75219. I am over the age
5 of 18 years and am not a party to this action.
On the date set forth below, I served the foregoing document(s) described as
6
STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, on the following person(s)
7
in this action:
8
9 John Eck
10 eck@g-tlaw.com
11 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
12
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL: I caused such documents to be scanned into PDF format and
13
sent via electronic mail to the email address(es) of the address(es) above.
14
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of
15 California that the foregoing is true and correct.
16 Executed on May 15, 2023, at Dallas, Texas.
17
18 Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
EXHIBIT A
1
Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda (SBN 249085)
2 EDWARDS & DE LA CERDA, PLLC
3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1100
3 Dallas, TX 75219
P: 214.550.5239
4 F: 214.722.2101
5 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
7
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
8
9
JOHN DOE CLG03277, Case No.: 22CV05053
10 Judge: Hon. Thomas P. Anderle
Plaintiff, Department: 3
11
vs. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
12 DAMAGES FOR:
13 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, a business entity of form (1) NEGLIGENCE;
unknown; and DOES 1-500, (2) NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION;
14 (3) NEGLIGENT RETENTION/HIRING;
(4) NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN,
15 Defendants. TRAIN OR EDUCATE
16 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
17
COMES NOW, Plaintiff JOHN DOE CLG03277, who hereby complains and alleges
18
against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and DOES 1 through 500,
19
inclusive (“Defendants”), as follows:
20
COMPLIANCE WITH CODE CIV. PROC. § 340.1
21
1. Statement regarding Compliance with Code Civ. § Proc. 340.1: By Order dated
22
March 2, 2023, the Court found, after ex parte application for relief, that there is reasonable and
23
meritorious cause for filing of this action against the Defendant identified herein, and the Court
24
further authorized Plaintiff to serve the Complaint and Summons on the Defendant.
25
2. Statement regarding Compliance with Code Civ. § Proc. 340.1: By Order dated
26
March 8, 2023, the Court found, after ex parte application for relief, that one or more facts
27
corroborative of one or more of the charging allegations against Defendant CARPINTERIA
28
1
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT has been shown, and the Court further authorized Plaintiff to name
2 the Defendant in this Amended Complaint.
3 THE PARTIES
4 3. Plaintiff is an adult individual, who is over the age of forty (40) years old. Therefore,
5 Plaintiff has filed a declaration from a mental healthcare practitioner, and an attorney declaration
6 for each named defendant in this Action, pursuant to the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure
7 §340.1. Moreover, each named defendant in this action shall be named as a “Doe” pursuant to the
8 requirement of Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(n), until such time as a declaration of corroborative
9 fact has been approved by the Court.
10 4. Plaintiff is currently a resident of the State of California.
11 5. Plaintiff was a resident of the State of California, during the time when the childhood
12 sexual abuse, harassment and/or assault occurred.
13 6. The childhood sexual abuse, harassment, and/or assault occurred within the State of
14 California, at least in part.
15 7. Defendant CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, at all times mentioned
16 herein, was and is a business entity of form unknown, having its principal place of business in the
17 County of Santa Barbara, State of California. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
18 purposely conducts substantial educational business activities in the State of California, and was
19 the primary entity owning, operating and controlling Main Elementary School, employing Virgil
20 F. Williams (“PERPETRATOR”), and responsible for monitoring and controlling their activities
21 and behavior.
22 8. PERPETRATOR is an adult individual. PERPETRATOR was in a position of trust,
23 confidence, and responsibility with Plaintiff, as a function of the position PERPETRATOR had
24 with CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. Specifically, PERPETRATOR was placed
25 in contact with minor children, through PERPETRATOR’s role with CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
26 SCHOOL DISTRICT, and thus, stood in loco parentis with Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s guardians.
27
28
2
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 9. PERPETRATOR was an agent, servant, employee, volunteer, principal, and/or staff
2 member of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT during the time of Plaintiff’s
3 childhood sexual abuse.
4 10. Collectively, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and/or DOES 1
5 through 500 are referred to as “DEFENDANTS.”
6 11. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that the true names and
7 capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, of Defendants named herein as
8 DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said Defendants by
9 such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend the Complaint to allege their true names and capacities
10 when such have been ascertained. Upon information and belief, each of the said Doe Defendants
11 is responsible in some manner under Code of Civil Procedure §§340.1(a)(1),(2),(3), and 340.1 (c)
12 for the occurrences herein alleged, and were a legal cause of the childhood sexual assault which
13 resulted in injury to Plaintiff as alleged herein.
14 12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis allege, that at all times
15 mentioned herein, there existed a unity of interest and ownership among Defendants and each of
16 them, such that any individuality and separateness between Defendants, and each of them, ceased
17 to exist. Defendants and each of them, were the successors-in-interest and/or alter egos of the other
18 Defendants, and each of them, in that they purchased, controlled, dominated and operated each
19 other without any separate identity, observation of formalities, or other manner of division. To
20 continue maintaining the facade of a separate and individual existence between and among
21 Defendants, and each of them, would serve to perpetrate a fraud and an injustice.
22 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times
23 mentioned herein, Defendants and each of them were the agents, representatives and/or employees
24 of each and every other Defendant. In doing the things hereinafter alleged, Defendants and each of
25 them, were acting within the course and scope of said alternative personality, capacity, identity,
26 agency, representation and/or employment and were within the scope of their authority, whether
27 actual or apparent. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times
28 mentioned herein, Defendants and each of them were the trustees, partners, servants, joint
3
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 venturers, shareholders, contractors, and/or employees of each and every other Defendant, and the
2 acts and omissions herein alleged were done by them, acting individually, through such capacity
3 and within the scope of their authority, and with the permission and consent of each and every other
4 Defendant and that said conduct was thereafter ratified by each and every other Defendant, and that
5 each of them is jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff.
6 CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ASSAULT, ABUSE AND/OR
7 HARASSMENT SUFFERED BY PLAINTIFF.
8 14. Plaintiff was subjected to acts of childhood sexual assault, harassment, abuse, and/or
9 molestation by PERPETRATOR. These acts of childhood sexual assault, harassment, abuse and/or
10 molestation perpetrated upon Plaintiff, began to occur when Plaintiff was under the age of 18 years
11 old, and constitute childhood sexual assault within the definition of Code of Civil Procedure
12 §340.1(d). These acts of childhood sexual assault, harassment, abuse and/or molestation resulted in
13 the personal physical injury, as well as emotional, psychological and psychiatric injury and damage
14 to Plaintiff.
15 15. Plaintiff was a minor child, under the age of 18, at the time of the sexual assaults,
16 harassment, and/or abuse alleged herein, therefore, Plaintiff did not, and was unable to, give free
17 or voluntary consent to the sexual acts and assaults committed upon Plaintiff by PERPETRATOR.
18 16. The sexual abuse, harassment and/or assaults were committed by PERPETRATOR
19 for his sexual gratification and was based upon the gender of Plaintiff.
20 17. The sexually abusive, harassing and/or assaultive acts by PERPETRATOR were
21 committed in violation of the California Penal Code, which proscribes sexual acts and misconduct
22 against minor children.
23 18. In the early and mid 1970’s, when Plaintiff was a minor and student at Main
24 Elementary School, PERPETRATOR, who was the principal at the school, sexually abused him.
25 This sexual abuse occurred over the course of approximately three school years, and it included
26 grooming, sexual touching, and masturbation. The sexual abuse occurred on the campus of Main
27 Elementary School and other locations.
28
4
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 DAMAGES SUFFERED BY PLAINTIFF AS A RESULT OF THEIR CHILDHOOD
2 SEXUAL ASSAULT, ABUSE, AND/OR HARASSMENT BY PERPETRATOR
3 19. As a direct and proximate result of the childhood sexual assault, harassment and
4 abuse committed against Plaintiff by PERPETRATOR, which was enabled and facilitated by
5 DEFENDANTS, Plaintiff has suffered personal physical injury of sexual assault, and has and will
6 continue to suffer, psychological, mental and emotional distress. Plaintiff suffered, and continues
7 to suffer, from, but is not limited to, the following conditions:
8 a. Anxiety;
9 b. Depression;
10 c. Flashbacks and/or reexperiencing;
11 d. Suicidal ideation or thoughts;
12 e. Suicide attempts;
13 f. Anger;
14 g. Betrayal;
15 h. Loss of faith;
16 i. Nervousness;
17 j. Problems with those in positions of authority;
18 k. Interpersonal relationship problems with those in positions of confidence or
19 trust;
20 l. Problems interacting with others, including but not limited to family
21 members; and
22 m. Guilt, shame, and/or humiliation;
23 20. As a direct and proximate result of the childhood sexual assault, harassment and
24 abuse committed against Plaintiff by PERPETRATOR, which was enabled and facilitated by
25 DEFENDANTS, Plaintiff has, and will continue to, incur expenses for mental, psychological,
26 psychiatric, and medical care due to the assault, according to proof at trial:
27 a. Future Medical Expenses, including but not limited psychological and/or
28 psychiatric care; and
5
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 b. Past Medical Expenses (Past) including but not limited psychological and/or
2 psychiatric care.
3 21. As a further direct and proximate result of PERPETRATOR’s sexual assaults,
4 harassment and abuse, which was enabled and facilitated by DEFENDANTS, Plaintiff has suffered
5 additional economic injury as follows:
6 a. Lost earning capacity (Future); and
7 b. Lost income (Past).
8 22. These damages were all suffered as to Plaintiff’s general, special and consequential
9 damage in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than the minimum jurisdictional
10 amount of this Court.
11 DUTIES OF DEFENDANTS TO PROTECT
12 PLAINTIFF AND CONTROL PERPETRATOR
13 23. At all times herein, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, knew or should have known
14 that PERPETRATOR was unfit, posed a risk of harm to minor children, and/or posed a risk of
15 childhood sexual assault to minor children in its care, custody and control. Specifically,
16 DEFENDANTS knew or should have known, or were otherwise on notice, that PERPETRATOR
17 had engaged in misconduct that created the risk of childhood sexual assault and failed to take
18 reasonable steps or to implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of childhood sexual assault
19 by PERPETRATOR on minors, including Plaintiff.
20 24. As a principal, staff member, employee, representative, servant, agent, and/or
21 volunteer of DEFENDANTS, and DOES 1 through 500, PERPETRATOR was placed into a
22 position of legal authority over Plaintiff and his parents. PERPETRATOR was a confidant to
23 Plaintiff and his family, and as a result, there was a special, trusting, confidential and fiduciary
24 relationship between Plaintiff and PERPETRATOR, as well as between DEFENDANTS and
25 Plaintiff. Through this relationship with Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS stood in loco parentis with
26 Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s family. Specifically, DEFENDANTS took Plaintiff into their custody, care
27 and control, which conferred upon Plaintiff and his family the reasonable belief that Plaintiff, a
28 minor child, would be protected and cared for, as if DEFENDANTS were Plaintiff’s own parents.
6
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 25. As a minor at CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, where
2 PERPETRATOR was employed, retained, and worked, Plaintiff was under PERPETRATOR’s, as
3 well as DEFENDANTS’ direct supervision, care and control, thus creating a special relationship,
4 fiduciary relationship, and/or special care relationship with DEFENDANTS, and each of them.
5 Additionally, as with all minor children under the custody, care and control of DEFENDANTS,
6 Defendants stood in loco parentis with respect to Plaintiff while Plaintiff was at CARPINTERIA
7 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. As the responsible parties and/or employers controlling
8 PERPETRATOR, Defendants were also in a special relationship with Plaintiff, and owed special
9 duties to Plaintiff.
10 26. DEFENDANTS also intentionally and willfully implemented various measures
11 intended and designed to, or which effectively, made PERPETRATOR’s conduct harder to detect
12 including, but not limited to:
13 a. Assigning and permitting PERPETRATOR to remain in a position of
14 authority and trust after DEFENDANTS knew or should have known that PERPETRATOR was an
15 unfit agent, servant, employee, member and/or volunteer;
16 b. Assigning and permitting PERPETRATOR to remain in a position of
17 authority and trust after DEFENDANTS knew or should have known that PERPETRATOR was
18 engaging in misconduct that created a risk of childhood sexual assault to be perpetrated by
19 PERPETRATOR;
20 c. Placing PERPETRATOR in a separate and secluded environment, including
21 placing him in charge of children, which allowed PERPETRATOR to sexually and physically
22 interact with and assault the children, including Plaintiff;
23 d. Authorizing PERPETRATOR to come into contact with minors, including
24 Plaintiff, without adequate supervision;
25 e. Failing to inform, or concealing from Plaintiff’s parents and law
26 enforcement officials the fact that Plaintiff and others were or may have been sexually assaulted
27 after Defendants knew or should have known that PERPETRATOR may have sexually assaulted
28 Plaintiff or others, thereby enabling Plaintiff to continue to be endangered and sexually assaulted,
7
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 and/or creating the circumstance where Plaintiff and others were less likely to receive
2 medical/mental health care and treatment, thus exacerbating the harm to Plaintiff;
3 f. Holding out and affirming PERPETRATOR to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s
4 parents, other children and their parents, and to the community as being in good standing and
5 trustworthy;
6 g. Failing to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable safeguards to
7 avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct by PERPETRATOR with students and minor children; and
8 h. Failing to put in place a system or procedure to supervise or monitor
9 employees, volunteers, representatives or agents to insure that they did not molest or assault minors
10 in DEFENDANTS’ custody or care, including Plaintiff.
11 27. By PERPETRATOR’s position with DEFENDANTS, Defendants demanded and
12 required that Plaintiff respect PERPETRATOR in his position of principal, advisor, confidant,
13 and/or mentor at CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
14 28. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that DEFENDANTS and
15 each of them, were or should have been aware of PERPETRATOR’s wrongful conduct at or about
16 the time it was occurring, and thereafter, but took no action to obstruct, inhibit or stop such
17 continuing conduct, or to help Plaintiff endure the trauma from such conduct. Despite the authority
18 and ability to do so, these DEFENDANTS negligently and/or willfully refused to, and/or did not
19 act effectively to stop the sexual assaults on Plaintiff, to inhibit or obstruct such assault, or to protect
20 Plaintiff from the results of that trauma.
21 29. During the period of assaults perpetrated upon Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS had the
22 authority and the ability to obstruct or stop PERPETRATOR’s sexual assaults on Plaintiff, but
23 intentionally, negligently and/or willfully failed to do so, thereby allowing the assault to occur and
24 to continue unabated. This failure was a part of DEFENDANTS ' intended plan and arrangement
25 to conceal wrongful acts, to avoid and inhibit detection, to block public disclosure, to avoid scandal,
26 to avoid the disclosure of their tolerance of child sexual molestation and assault, to preserve a false
27 appearance of propriety, and to avoid investigation and action by public authority including law
28 enforcement. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that such actions were
8
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 motivated by a desire to protect the reputation of DEFENDANTS and each of them, and to protect
2 the monetary support of DEFENDANTS while fostering an environment where such assault could
3 continue to occur.
4 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
5 30. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(q) as amended by Assembly Bill 218,
6 effective January 1, 2020 there is a three (3) year window in which all civil claims of childhood
7 sexual assault are revived if they have not been litigated to finality. This provision provides that,
8 “[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, any claim for damages described in paragraphs (1)
9 through (3), inclusive, of subdivision (a) that has not been litigated to finality and that would
10 otherwise be barred as of January 1, 2020, because the applicable statute of limitations, claim
11 presentation deadline, or any other time limit had expired, is revived, and these claims may be
12 commenced within three years of January 1, 2020. A plaintiff shall have the later of the three-year
13 time period under this subdivision or the time period under subdivision (a) as amended by the act
14 that added this subdivision.” These claims of Plaintiff have not been previously litigated to finality
15 and have been filed (or are still pending) within the timeframe specified supra, thus, it is timely
16 under the revised provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(q).
17 31. Plaintiff is over the age of forty (40) years old at the time of filing of the Complaint.
18 Since this action is being commenced after Plaintiff’s 40th birthday, and as set forth more fully
19 supra, it is upon information, and therefore belief, that the DEFENDANTS knew or had reason to
20 know, or were otherwise on notice, of misconduct that created a risk of childhood sexual assault by
21 PERPETRATOR
22 32. Since this action is being commenced after Plaintiff’s 40th birthday, and as set forth
23 more fully supra, it is upon information, and therefore belief, that the DEFENDANTS failed to
24 take reasonable steps, or to implement reasonable safeguards, to avoid acts of childhood sexual
25 assault, including but not limited to preventing or avoiding placement of PERPETRATOR in a
26 function or environment in which contact with children was an inherent part of that function or
27 environment.
28
9
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 33. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(g)(1), a separate Certificate of Merit
2 was filed by Plaintiff’s attorney for each defendant in this action.
3 34. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(g)(2), a declaration from a mental
4 healthcare practitioner was filed concurrently with the instant Complaint for Plaintiff.
5 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
6 NEGLIGENCE
7 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
8 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500)
9 35. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior
10 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein.
11 36. As more fully set forth above, the conduct and actions of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
12 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500 served to create an environment in which
13 PERPETRATOR was afforded years of continuous secluded access to minor children including
14 Plaintiff, a minor child at the time of their sexual assaults by PERPETRATOR.
15 37. As more fully set forth above, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and
16 DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were aware and/or on notice of PERPETRATOR’s sexual
17 misconduct with minors prior to the first occasion on which Plaintiff was placed in
18 PERPETRATOR’s custody through the acts of Defendants. Accordingly, at the time
19 PERPETRATOR and CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
20 inclusive, performed the acts alleged herein, it was or should have been reasonably foreseeable to
21 DEFENDANTS that by continuously exposing and making Plaintiff available to PERPETRATOR,
22 DEFENDANTS were placing Plaintiff in grave risk of being sexually assaulted by
23 PERPETRATOR. By knowingly subjecting Plaintiff to such foreseeable danger, Defendants
24 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were duty-
25 bound to take reasonable steps and implement reasonable safeguards to protect Plaintiff from
26 PERPETRATOR. Furthermore, as alleged herein, Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
27 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, at all times exercised a sufficient degree
28 of control over PERPETRATOR’s personal and business affairs to prevent the acts of assault by
10
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 keeping PERPETRATOR away from Plaintiffs. However, Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
2 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, failed to take any reasonable steps or
3 implement any reasonable safeguards for Plaintiff’s protection whatsoever, and continued to make
4 Plaintiff accessible to PERPETRATOR for the purposes of sexual assault.
5 38. As a direct and proximate result of the failure of Defendants CARPINTERIA
6 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, to protect Plaintiff from the
7 acts of childhood sexual assault to which they were subjected to by PERPETRATOR, Plaintiff has
8 suffered the physical injury of sexual assault and has suffered and will continue to suffer severe
9 mental and emotional distress including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and body, shock,
10 emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-
11 esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer
12 and were prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities and
13 obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have
14 incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and
15 counseling; and loss of past and future earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at
16 the time of trial.
17 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
18 NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION
19 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
20 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500)
21 39. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior
22 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein.
23 40. By virtue of Plaintiff’s special relationship with CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
24 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, and CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
25 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s, inclusive, relation to PERPETRATOR,
26 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, owed
27 Plaintiff a duty to provide reasonable supervision of Plaintiff, to provide reasonable supervision of
28 PERPETRATOR, to use reasonable care in investigating PERPETRATOR’s background, and to
11
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 provide adequate warning to Plaintiff, their families, and other children, of PERPETRATOR’s
2 dangerous propensities and unfitness. Said Defendants, and each of them, further owed Plaintiff a
3 duty to protect against the foreseeable risk of sexual assaults committed upon children, including
4 Plaintiff, during or arising out of those activities sponsored and controlled by Defendants in which
5 Plaintiff was a participant.
6 41. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that CARPINTERIA
7 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, by and through their
8 respective agents, servants and employees, knew or should have known of PERPETRATOR’s
9 dangerous and exploitive propensities and/or that PERPETRATOR was an unfit agent. Despite
10 such knowledge, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
11 inclusive, negligently failed to supervise PERPETRATOR in his position of trust and authority as
12 an authority figure and supervisor of children, where they were able to commit wrongful acts
13 against Plaintiff. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
14 inclusive, failed to provide reasonable supervision of PERPETRATOR, failed to use reasonable
15 care in investigating PERPETRATOR and failed to provide adequate warning to Plaintiff of
16 PERPETRATOR’s dangerous propensities and unfitness. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL
17 DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, further failed to take reasonable measures to
18 prevent sexual assault, harassment, and molestation of children, including Plaintiff.
19 42. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that CARPINTERIA
20 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were put on notice, and knew
21 or should have known, that PERPETRATOR had previously engaged and was continuing to engage
22 in unlawful sexual conduct with children and committed other felonies, for his own personal
23 gratification, and that it was, or should have been foreseeable that he was engaging, or would
24 engage in illicit sexual activities with Plaintiff, and others, under the cloak of his authority,
25 confidence, and trust, bestowed upon him through CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL
26 DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, and each of them.
27 43. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis alleges, that CARPINTERIA
28 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were placed on actual or
12
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 constructive notice that, PERPETRATOR had assaulted children prior to, and/or during the time
2 he was in contact with Plaintiffs. Plaintiff is informed, and thereon alleges, that CARPINTERIA
3 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were informed of sexual
4 assault, harassment and molestations committed by PERPETRATOR or of conduct that would put
5 a reasonable person on notice of such propensity to assault, harassment and molestation.
6 44. Even though CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through
7 500, inclusive, knew or should have known of these activities by PERPETRATOR,
8 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, did nothing
9 to investigate, supervise or monitor PERPETRATOR to ensure the safety of the guests.
10 45. As an institution entrusted with the care of minors, where staff, employees, agents,
11 and management, such as PERPETRATOR were placed in contact with minors, CARPINTERIA
12 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s expressly and implicitly represented
13 that these individuals, including PERPETRATOR, were not a sexual threat to children and others
14 who would fall under PERPETRATOR 's influence, control, direction, and guidance.
15 46. Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through
16 500, inclusive, negligently failed to supervise PERPETRATOR in his positions of trust and
17 authority as an employee, agent, counselor and mentor, and/or other authority figure, where
18 PERPETRATOR was able to commit wrongful acts against Plaintiff. Defendants CARPINTERIA
19 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, failed to provide reasonable
20 supervision of PERPETRATOR. Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
21 and DOES 1 through 500 further failed to take reasonable measures to prevent sexual harassment,
22 molestation and assault of minors, including Plaintiff.
23 47. At no time during the periods of time alleged did CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
24 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, have in place a system or procedure to
25 reasonably investigate, supervise and monitor individuals in contact with minor children, including
26 PERPETRATOR, to prevent pre-sexual grooming and sexual harassment, molestation and assault
27 of children, nor did they implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward
28
13
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 minors, students and others in CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1
2 through 500’s care.
3 48. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
4 inclusive, were or should have known to be aware and understand how vulnerable children were to
5 sexual harassment, molestation and assault by mentors, advisors, and other persons of authority
6 within CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive.
7 49. Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through
8 500’s, inclusive, conduct was a breach of their duties to Plaintiff.
9 50. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
10 inclusive, breached their duty to Plaintiff by, inter alia, failing to adequately monitor and supervise
11 PERPETRATOR and stopping PERPETRATOR from committing wrongful sexual acts with
12 minors including Plaintiff. This belief is founded on the fact that employees and staff of
13 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, including
14 had suspected the assault was occurring at the time, and failed to investigate into the matter further.
15 Based on these facts, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
16 inclusive, knew or should have known of PERPETRATOR 's incapacity to supervise and stop
17 employees of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
18 inclusive from committing wrongful sexual acts with minors.
19 51. As a direct and proximate result of the failures of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
20 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue
21 to suffer the physical injury of childhood sexual assault, severe mental and emotional distress
22 including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical
23 manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and
24 loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer and were prevented and will continue
25 to be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will
26 sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have incurred and will continue to incur expenses
27 for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling; and loss of past and future
28 earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial.
14
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
2 NEGLIGENT RETENTION/HIRING
3 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
4 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500)
5 52. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior
6 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein.
7 53. By virtue of Plaintiff’s special relationship with Defendants, inclusive and each of
8 them, and CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s, inclusive,
9 relation to PERPETRATOR, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1
10 through 500, inclusive, owed Plaintiff a duty to not hire and/or retain PERPETRATOR, given his
11 dangerous and exploitive propensities, which CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
12 and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, knew or should have known had they engaged in a meaningful
13 and adequate investigation of his background prior to his hiring.
14 54. As an institution entrusted with the care of minors, where staff, employees, agents,
15 and management, such as PERPETRATOR was placed in contact with minors, CARPINTERIA
16 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, inclusive, expressly and implicitly
17 represented that these individuals, including PERPETRATOR, were not a sexual threat to children
18 and others who would fall under PERPETRATOR 's influence, control, direction, and guidance.
19 55. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that at no time during the
20 periods of time alleged did CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through
21 500’s, inclusive, have in place a system or procedure to reasonably investigate, supervise and/or
22 monitor those individuals in direct contact with children, including PERPETRATOR, to prevent
23 pre-sexual grooming and/or sexual harassment, molestation and assault of parishioners, nor did
24 they implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward patrons and others in
25 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, inclusive, care.
26 56. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
27 inclusive, and each of them were or should have been aware and understood how vulnerable minor
28 children were to sexual assault, harassment and molestation by persons of authority, including
15
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 PERPETRATOR, within the control of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and
2 DOES 1 through 500, inclusive.
3 57. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, other children and/or
4 employees of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's,
5 inclusive, complained of PERPETRATOR’s sexual improprieties prior to the sexual assault of
6 Plaintiff. Either CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's,
7 inclusive, knew, or at the very least should have known of PERPETRATOR’s prior history of
8 sexual misconduct with minors prior to Plaintiff’s assaults.
9 58. Plaintiff is informed, and believes, and on that basis alleges, that the
10 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were put on
11 notice, and should have known that PERPETRATOR had previously engaged and continued to
12 engage in unlawful sexual conduct with patrons and other felonies, for his own personal
13 gratification, and that it was, or should have been foreseeable that he was engaging, or would
14 engage in illicit sexual activities with Plaintiff, and others, under the cloak of his authority,
15 confidence, and trust, bestowed upon him through CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL
16 DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive.
17 59. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that CARPINTERIA
18 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, inclusive, were placed on actual and/or
19 constructive notice that PERPETRATOR had abused, harassed, molested and/or was molesting
20 minor children, both before his sexual assault, molestation and harassment of Plaintiff, and during
21 that same period. Plaintiff is informed, and thereon alleges, that other third parties, patrons, and/or
22 law enforcement officials informed CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1
23 through 500, inclusive, of inappropriate conduct and molestations committed by PERPETRATOR.
24 60. Even though CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through
25 500, inclusive, knew or should have known of these activities by PERPETRATOR, Plaintiff is
26 informed that CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
27 inclusive, failed to use reasonable care in investigating PERPETRATOR and did nothing to
28
16
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 investigate, supervise or monitor PERPETRATOR to ensure the safety of the other minor children
2 in his charge, including Plaintiff.
3 61. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s,
4 inclusive, conduct was a breach of their duties to Plaintiff.
5 62. As a direct and proximate result of the failures of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
6 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Plaintiffs have suffered and will
7 continue to suffer the physical injury of sexual assault, and severe mental and emotional distress
8 including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical
9 manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and
10 loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer and were prevented and will continue
11 to be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will
12 sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have incurred and will continue to incur expenses
13 for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling; and loss of past and future
14 earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial.
15 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
16 NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO TRAIN, WARN OR EDUCATE
17 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
18 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500)
19 63. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior
20 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein.
21 64. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
22 inclusive owed Plaintiff a duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect Plaintiff and other
23 minor children in their charge from the risk of sexual assault, harassment and molestation by
24 PERPETRATOR by properly warning, training or educating Plaintiff and other minors about how
25 to avoid such a risk.
26 65. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500,
27 inclusive, breached their duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect Plaintiff and other
28 minor children in their charge, from the risk of sexual assault, harassment and molestation by
17
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 PERPETRATOR such as the failure to properly warn, train or educate Plaintiff and other minor
2 children in their charge about how to avoid such a risk.
3 66. Defendants breached their duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect
4 Plaintiff and other minor children in their charge from the risk of sexual harassment, molestation
5 and assault by PERPETRATOR, by failing to supervising and/or stop employees of
6 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, including
7 PERPETRATOR from committing wrongful sexual acts with minor children, including Plaintiff.
8 67. As a direct and proximate result of the failures of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED
9 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue
10 to suffer severe mental and emotional distress including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and
11 body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss
12 of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to
13 suffer and were prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities and
14 obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have
15 incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and
16 counseling; and loss of past and future earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at
17 the time of trial.
18 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
19 Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for Judgment against Defendants as follows:
20 1. For past, present and future general damage
Preview
ELECTRONICALLY FILED 1 Superior Court of California Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda (SBN 249085) County of Santa Barbara 2 EDWARDS & DE LA CERDA, PLLC Darrel E. Parker, Executive Officer 3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1100 5/15/2023 3:29 PM 3 Dallas, TX 75219 By: Terri Chavez , Deputy P: 214.550.5239 4 F: 214.722.2101 5 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 6 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 9 10 JOHN DOE CLG03277, Case No.: 22CV05053 Judge: Hon. Thomas P. Anderle 11 Plaintiff, Department: 3 12 vs. STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 13 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, a business entity of form Date Filed: December 22, 2022 14 unknown; and DOES 1-500, Trial Date: February 28, 2024 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 COME NOW, Plaintiff JOHN DOE CLG03277 (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant 19 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (“Defendant”) and hereby stipulate as follows: 20 WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the original Complaint on December 22, 2022; 21 WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint on March 14, 2023, adding the 22 true name of Defendant pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 340.1; 23 WHEREAS, Plaintiff served Defendant with the First Amended Complaint on March 15, 24 2023; 25 WHEREAS, as a result of the parties’ meet-and-confer as to the allegations in the First 26 Amended Complaint, Plaintiff has agreed to file a Second Amended Complaint removing certain 27 allegations in exchange for Defendant’s agreement to file an answer to the Second Amended 28 1 STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 Complaint; 2 NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant hereby stipulate that: 3 1. Plaintiff may file a Second Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached 4 hereto as Exhibit “A”; and 5 2. Defendant shall have until May 31, 2023 to file an answer to the Second 6 Amended Complaint. 7 Dated: May 15, 2023 EDWARDS & DE LA CERDA, PLLC 8 9 By: Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda (SBN 249085) 10 Edwards & de la Cerda, PLLC 3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1100 11 Dallas, TX 75219 P: 214.550.5239 12 F: 214.722.2101 peter@edwardsdelacerda.com 13 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 14 15 16 Dated: May 11, 2023 GRIFFITH & THORNBURGH, LLP 17 18 By: _______________________________ 19 John C. Eck ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 John Doe CLG03277 v. Carpinteria Unified School District, et al.; Case No. 22CV05053 3 I, Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda, state: 4 My business address is 3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1110 Dallas, Texas 75219. I am over the age 5 of 18 years and am not a party to this action. On the date set forth below, I served the foregoing document(s) described as 6 STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, on the following person(s) 7 in this action: 8 9 John Eck 10 eck@g-tlaw.com 11 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 12 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL: I caused such documents to be scanned into PDF format and 13 sent via electronic mail to the email address(es) of the address(es) above. 14 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of 15 California that the foregoing is true and correct. 16 Executed on May 15, 2023, at Dallas, Texas. 17 18 Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION RE FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT EXHIBIT A 1 Pedro “Peter” de la Cerda (SBN 249085) 2 EDWARDS & DE LA CERDA, PLLC 3500 Maple Ave., Ste 1100 3 Dallas, TX 75219 P: 214.550.5239 4 F: 214.722.2101 5 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 6 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 8 9 JOHN DOE CLG03277, Case No.: 22CV05053 10 Judge: Hon. Thomas P. Anderle Plaintiff, Department: 3 11 vs. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR 12 DAMAGES FOR: 13 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, a business entity of form (1) NEGLIGENCE; unknown; and DOES 1-500, (2) NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION; 14 (3) NEGLIGENT RETENTION/HIRING; (4) NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN, 15 Defendants. TRAIN OR EDUCATE 16 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 17 COMES NOW, Plaintiff JOHN DOE CLG03277, who hereby complains and alleges 18 against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and DOES 1 through 500, 19 inclusive (“Defendants”), as follows: 20 COMPLIANCE WITH CODE CIV. PROC. § 340.1 21 1. Statement regarding Compliance with Code Civ. § Proc. 340.1: By Order dated 22 March 2, 2023, the Court found, after ex parte application for relief, that there is reasonable and 23 meritorious cause for filing of this action against the Defendant identified herein, and the Court 24 further authorized Plaintiff to serve the Complaint and Summons on the Defendant. 25 2. Statement regarding Compliance with Code Civ. § Proc. 340.1: By Order dated 26 March 8, 2023, the Court found, after ex parte application for relief, that one or more facts 27 corroborative of one or more of the charging allegations against Defendant CARPINTERIA 28 1 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT has been shown, and the Court further authorized Plaintiff to name 2 the Defendant in this Amended Complaint. 3 THE PARTIES 4 3. Plaintiff is an adult individual, who is over the age of forty (40) years old. Therefore, 5 Plaintiff has filed a declaration from a mental healthcare practitioner, and an attorney declaration 6 for each named defendant in this Action, pursuant to the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure 7 §340.1. Moreover, each named defendant in this action shall be named as a “Doe” pursuant to the 8 requirement of Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(n), until such time as a declaration of corroborative 9 fact has been approved by the Court. 10 4. Plaintiff is currently a resident of the State of California. 11 5. Plaintiff was a resident of the State of California, during the time when the childhood 12 sexual abuse, harassment and/or assault occurred. 13 6. The childhood sexual abuse, harassment, and/or assault occurred within the State of 14 California, at least in part. 15 7. Defendant CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, at all times mentioned 16 herein, was and is a business entity of form unknown, having its principal place of business in the 17 County of Santa Barbara, State of California. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 18 purposely conducts substantial educational business activities in the State of California, and was 19 the primary entity owning, operating and controlling Main Elementary School, employing Virgil 20 F. Williams (“PERPETRATOR”), and responsible for monitoring and controlling their activities 21 and behavior. 22 8. PERPETRATOR is an adult individual. PERPETRATOR was in a position of trust, 23 confidence, and responsibility with Plaintiff, as a function of the position PERPETRATOR had 24 with CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. Specifically, PERPETRATOR was placed 25 in contact with minor children, through PERPETRATOR’s role with CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 26 SCHOOL DISTRICT, and thus, stood in loco parentis with Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s guardians. 27 28 2 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 9. PERPETRATOR was an agent, servant, employee, volunteer, principal, and/or staff 2 member of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT during the time of Plaintiff’s 3 childhood sexual abuse. 4 10. Collectively, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and/or DOES 1 5 through 500 are referred to as “DEFENDANTS.” 6 11. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that the true names and 7 capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, of Defendants named herein as 8 DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said Defendants by 9 such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend the Complaint to allege their true names and capacities 10 when such have been ascertained. Upon information and belief, each of the said Doe Defendants 11 is responsible in some manner under Code of Civil Procedure §§340.1(a)(1),(2),(3), and 340.1 (c) 12 for the occurrences herein alleged, and were a legal cause of the childhood sexual assault which 13 resulted in injury to Plaintiff as alleged herein. 14 12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis allege, that at all times 15 mentioned herein, there existed a unity of interest and ownership among Defendants and each of 16 them, such that any individuality and separateness between Defendants, and each of them, ceased 17 to exist. Defendants and each of them, were the successors-in-interest and/or alter egos of the other 18 Defendants, and each of them, in that they purchased, controlled, dominated and operated each 19 other without any separate identity, observation of formalities, or other manner of division. To 20 continue maintaining the facade of a separate and individual existence between and among 21 Defendants, and each of them, would serve to perpetrate a fraud and an injustice. 22 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times 23 mentioned herein, Defendants and each of them were the agents, representatives and/or employees 24 of each and every other Defendant. In doing the things hereinafter alleged, Defendants and each of 25 them, were acting within the course and scope of said alternative personality, capacity, identity, 26 agency, representation and/or employment and were within the scope of their authority, whether 27 actual or apparent. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all times 28 mentioned herein, Defendants and each of them were the trustees, partners, servants, joint 3 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 venturers, shareholders, contractors, and/or employees of each and every other Defendant, and the 2 acts and omissions herein alleged were done by them, acting individually, through such capacity 3 and within the scope of their authority, and with the permission and consent of each and every other 4 Defendant and that said conduct was thereafter ratified by each and every other Defendant, and that 5 each of them is jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff. 6 CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ASSAULT, ABUSE AND/OR 7 HARASSMENT SUFFERED BY PLAINTIFF. 8 14. Plaintiff was subjected to acts of childhood sexual assault, harassment, abuse, and/or 9 molestation by PERPETRATOR. These acts of childhood sexual assault, harassment, abuse and/or 10 molestation perpetrated upon Plaintiff, began to occur when Plaintiff was under the age of 18 years 11 old, and constitute childhood sexual assault within the definition of Code of Civil Procedure 12 §340.1(d). These acts of childhood sexual assault, harassment, abuse and/or molestation resulted in 13 the personal physical injury, as well as emotional, psychological and psychiatric injury and damage 14 to Plaintiff. 15 15. Plaintiff was a minor child, under the age of 18, at the time of the sexual assaults, 16 harassment, and/or abuse alleged herein, therefore, Plaintiff did not, and was unable to, give free 17 or voluntary consent to the sexual acts and assaults committed upon Plaintiff by PERPETRATOR. 18 16. The sexual abuse, harassment and/or assaults were committed by PERPETRATOR 19 for his sexual gratification and was based upon the gender of Plaintiff. 20 17. The sexually abusive, harassing and/or assaultive acts by PERPETRATOR were 21 committed in violation of the California Penal Code, which proscribes sexual acts and misconduct 22 against minor children. 23 18. In the early and mid 1970’s, when Plaintiff was a minor and student at Main 24 Elementary School, PERPETRATOR, who was the principal at the school, sexually abused him. 25 This sexual abuse occurred over the course of approximately three school years, and it included 26 grooming, sexual touching, and masturbation. The sexual abuse occurred on the campus of Main 27 Elementary School and other locations. 28 4 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 DAMAGES SUFFERED BY PLAINTIFF AS A RESULT OF THEIR CHILDHOOD 2 SEXUAL ASSAULT, ABUSE, AND/OR HARASSMENT BY PERPETRATOR 3 19. As a direct and proximate result of the childhood sexual assault, harassment and 4 abuse committed against Plaintiff by PERPETRATOR, which was enabled and facilitated by 5 DEFENDANTS, Plaintiff has suffered personal physical injury of sexual assault, and has and will 6 continue to suffer, psychological, mental and emotional distress. Plaintiff suffered, and continues 7 to suffer, from, but is not limited to, the following conditions: 8 a. Anxiety; 9 b. Depression; 10 c. Flashbacks and/or reexperiencing; 11 d. Suicidal ideation or thoughts; 12 e. Suicide attempts; 13 f. Anger; 14 g. Betrayal; 15 h. Loss of faith; 16 i. Nervousness; 17 j. Problems with those in positions of authority; 18 k. Interpersonal relationship problems with those in positions of confidence or 19 trust; 20 l. Problems interacting with others, including but not limited to family 21 members; and 22 m. Guilt, shame, and/or humiliation; 23 20. As a direct and proximate result of the childhood sexual assault, harassment and 24 abuse committed against Plaintiff by PERPETRATOR, which was enabled and facilitated by 25 DEFENDANTS, Plaintiff has, and will continue to, incur expenses for mental, psychological, 26 psychiatric, and medical care due to the assault, according to proof at trial: 27 a. Future Medical Expenses, including but not limited psychological and/or 28 psychiatric care; and 5 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 b. Past Medical Expenses (Past) including but not limited psychological and/or 2 psychiatric care. 3 21. As a further direct and proximate result of PERPETRATOR’s sexual assaults, 4 harassment and abuse, which was enabled and facilitated by DEFENDANTS, Plaintiff has suffered 5 additional economic injury as follows: 6 a. Lost earning capacity (Future); and 7 b. Lost income (Past). 8 22. These damages were all suffered as to Plaintiff’s general, special and consequential 9 damage in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than the minimum jurisdictional 10 amount of this Court. 11 DUTIES OF DEFENDANTS TO PROTECT 12 PLAINTIFF AND CONTROL PERPETRATOR 13 23. At all times herein, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, knew or should have known 14 that PERPETRATOR was unfit, posed a risk of harm to minor children, and/or posed a risk of 15 childhood sexual assault to minor children in its care, custody and control. Specifically, 16 DEFENDANTS knew or should have known, or were otherwise on notice, that PERPETRATOR 17 had engaged in misconduct that created the risk of childhood sexual assault and failed to take 18 reasonable steps or to implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of childhood sexual assault 19 by PERPETRATOR on minors, including Plaintiff. 20 24. As a principal, staff member, employee, representative, servant, agent, and/or 21 volunteer of DEFENDANTS, and DOES 1 through 500, PERPETRATOR was placed into a 22 position of legal authority over Plaintiff and his parents. PERPETRATOR was a confidant to 23 Plaintiff and his family, and as a result, there was a special, trusting, confidential and fiduciary 24 relationship between Plaintiff and PERPETRATOR, as well as between DEFENDANTS and 25 Plaintiff. Through this relationship with Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS stood in loco parentis with 26 Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s family. Specifically, DEFENDANTS took Plaintiff into their custody, care 27 and control, which conferred upon Plaintiff and his family the reasonable belief that Plaintiff, a 28 minor child, would be protected and cared for, as if DEFENDANTS were Plaintiff’s own parents. 6 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 25. As a minor at CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, where 2 PERPETRATOR was employed, retained, and worked, Plaintiff was under PERPETRATOR’s, as 3 well as DEFENDANTS’ direct supervision, care and control, thus creating a special relationship, 4 fiduciary relationship, and/or special care relationship with DEFENDANTS, and each of them. 5 Additionally, as with all minor children under the custody, care and control of DEFENDANTS, 6 Defendants stood in loco parentis with respect to Plaintiff while Plaintiff was at CARPINTERIA 7 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. As the responsible parties and/or employers controlling 8 PERPETRATOR, Defendants were also in a special relationship with Plaintiff, and owed special 9 duties to Plaintiff. 10 26. DEFENDANTS also intentionally and willfully implemented various measures 11 intended and designed to, or which effectively, made PERPETRATOR’s conduct harder to detect 12 including, but not limited to: 13 a. Assigning and permitting PERPETRATOR to remain in a position of 14 authority and trust after DEFENDANTS knew or should have known that PERPETRATOR was an 15 unfit agent, servant, employee, member and/or volunteer; 16 b. Assigning and permitting PERPETRATOR to remain in a position of 17 authority and trust after DEFENDANTS knew or should have known that PERPETRATOR was 18 engaging in misconduct that created a risk of childhood sexual assault to be perpetrated by 19 PERPETRATOR; 20 c. Placing PERPETRATOR in a separate and secluded environment, including 21 placing him in charge of children, which allowed PERPETRATOR to sexually and physically 22 interact with and assault the children, including Plaintiff; 23 d. Authorizing PERPETRATOR to come into contact with minors, including 24 Plaintiff, without adequate supervision; 25 e. Failing to inform, or concealing from Plaintiff’s parents and law 26 enforcement officials the fact that Plaintiff and others were or may have been sexually assaulted 27 after Defendants knew or should have known that PERPETRATOR may have sexually assaulted 28 Plaintiff or others, thereby enabling Plaintiff to continue to be endangered and sexually assaulted, 7 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 and/or creating the circumstance where Plaintiff and others were less likely to receive 2 medical/mental health care and treatment, thus exacerbating the harm to Plaintiff; 3 f. Holding out and affirming PERPETRATOR to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s 4 parents, other children and their parents, and to the community as being in good standing and 5 trustworthy; 6 g. Failing to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable safeguards to 7 avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct by PERPETRATOR with students and minor children; and 8 h. Failing to put in place a system or procedure to supervise or monitor 9 employees, volunteers, representatives or agents to insure that they did not molest or assault minors 10 in DEFENDANTS’ custody or care, including Plaintiff. 11 27. By PERPETRATOR’s position with DEFENDANTS, Defendants demanded and 12 required that Plaintiff respect PERPETRATOR in his position of principal, advisor, confidant, 13 and/or mentor at CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. 14 28. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that DEFENDANTS and 15 each of them, were or should have been aware of PERPETRATOR’s wrongful conduct at or about 16 the time it was occurring, and thereafter, but took no action to obstruct, inhibit or stop such 17 continuing conduct, or to help Plaintiff endure the trauma from such conduct. Despite the authority 18 and ability to do so, these DEFENDANTS negligently and/or willfully refused to, and/or did not 19 act effectively to stop the sexual assaults on Plaintiff, to inhibit or obstruct such assault, or to protect 20 Plaintiff from the results of that trauma. 21 29. During the period of assaults perpetrated upon Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS had the 22 authority and the ability to obstruct or stop PERPETRATOR’s sexual assaults on Plaintiff, but 23 intentionally, negligently and/or willfully failed to do so, thereby allowing the assault to occur and 24 to continue unabated. This failure was a part of DEFENDANTS ' intended plan and arrangement 25 to conceal wrongful acts, to avoid and inhibit detection, to block public disclosure, to avoid scandal, 26 to avoid the disclosure of their tolerance of child sexual molestation and assault, to preserve a false 27 appearance of propriety, and to avoid investigation and action by public authority including law 28 enforcement. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that such actions were 8 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 motivated by a desire to protect the reputation of DEFENDANTS and each of them, and to protect 2 the monetary support of DEFENDANTS while fostering an environment where such assault could 3 continue to occur. 4 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS 5 30. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(q) as amended by Assembly Bill 218, 6 effective January 1, 2020 there is a three (3) year window in which all civil claims of childhood 7 sexual assault are revived if they have not been litigated to finality. This provision provides that, 8 “[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, any claim for damages described in paragraphs (1) 9 through (3), inclusive, of subdivision (a) that has not been litigated to finality and that would 10 otherwise be barred as of January 1, 2020, because the applicable statute of limitations, claim 11 presentation deadline, or any other time limit had expired, is revived, and these claims may be 12 commenced within three years of January 1, 2020. A plaintiff shall have the later of the three-year 13 time period under this subdivision or the time period under subdivision (a) as amended by the act 14 that added this subdivision.” These claims of Plaintiff have not been previously litigated to finality 15 and have been filed (or are still pending) within the timeframe specified supra, thus, it is timely 16 under the revised provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(q). 17 31. Plaintiff is over the age of forty (40) years old at the time of filing of the Complaint. 18 Since this action is being commenced after Plaintiff’s 40th birthday, and as set forth more fully 19 supra, it is upon information, and therefore belief, that the DEFENDANTS knew or had reason to 20 know, or were otherwise on notice, of misconduct that created a risk of childhood sexual assault by 21 PERPETRATOR 22 32. Since this action is being commenced after Plaintiff’s 40th birthday, and as set forth 23 more fully supra, it is upon information, and therefore belief, that the DEFENDANTS failed to 24 take reasonable steps, or to implement reasonable safeguards, to avoid acts of childhood sexual 25 assault, including but not limited to preventing or avoiding placement of PERPETRATOR in a 26 function or environment in which contact with children was an inherent part of that function or 27 environment. 28 9 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 33. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(g)(1), a separate Certificate of Merit 2 was filed by Plaintiff’s attorney for each defendant in this action. 3 34. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(g)(2), a declaration from a mental 4 healthcare practitioner was filed concurrently with the instant Complaint for Plaintiff. 5 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 6 NEGLIGENCE 7 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 8 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500) 9 35. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior 10 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 11 36. As more fully set forth above, the conduct and actions of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 12 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500 served to create an environment in which 13 PERPETRATOR was afforded years of continuous secluded access to minor children including 14 Plaintiff, a minor child at the time of their sexual assaults by PERPETRATOR. 15 37. As more fully set forth above, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and 16 DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were aware and/or on notice of PERPETRATOR’s sexual 17 misconduct with minors prior to the first occasion on which Plaintiff was placed in 18 PERPETRATOR’s custody through the acts of Defendants. Accordingly, at the time 19 PERPETRATOR and CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 20 inclusive, performed the acts alleged herein, it was or should have been reasonably foreseeable to 21 DEFENDANTS that by continuously exposing and making Plaintiff available to PERPETRATOR, 22 DEFENDANTS were placing Plaintiff in grave risk of being sexually assaulted by 23 PERPETRATOR. By knowingly subjecting Plaintiff to such foreseeable danger, Defendants 24 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were duty- 25 bound to take reasonable steps and implement reasonable safeguards to protect Plaintiff from 26 PERPETRATOR. Furthermore, as alleged herein, Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 27 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, at all times exercised a sufficient degree 28 of control over PERPETRATOR’s personal and business affairs to prevent the acts of assault by 10 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 keeping PERPETRATOR away from Plaintiffs. However, Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 2 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, failed to take any reasonable steps or 3 implement any reasonable safeguards for Plaintiff’s protection whatsoever, and continued to make 4 Plaintiff accessible to PERPETRATOR for the purposes of sexual assault. 5 38. As a direct and proximate result of the failure of Defendants CARPINTERIA 6 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, to protect Plaintiff from the 7 acts of childhood sexual assault to which they were subjected to by PERPETRATOR, Plaintiff has 8 suffered the physical injury of sexual assault and has suffered and will continue to suffer severe 9 mental and emotional distress including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and body, shock, 10 emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self- 11 esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer 12 and were prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities and 13 obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have 14 incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and 15 counseling; and loss of past and future earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at 16 the time of trial. 17 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 18 NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 19 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 20 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500) 21 39. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior 22 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 23 40. By virtue of Plaintiff’s special relationship with CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 24 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, and CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 25 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s, inclusive, relation to PERPETRATOR, 26 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, owed 27 Plaintiff a duty to provide reasonable supervision of Plaintiff, to provide reasonable supervision of 28 PERPETRATOR, to use reasonable care in investigating PERPETRATOR’s background, and to 11 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 provide adequate warning to Plaintiff, their families, and other children, of PERPETRATOR’s 2 dangerous propensities and unfitness. Said Defendants, and each of them, further owed Plaintiff a 3 duty to protect against the foreseeable risk of sexual assaults committed upon children, including 4 Plaintiff, during or arising out of those activities sponsored and controlled by Defendants in which 5 Plaintiff was a participant. 6 41. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that CARPINTERIA 7 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, by and through their 8 respective agents, servants and employees, knew or should have known of PERPETRATOR’s 9 dangerous and exploitive propensities and/or that PERPETRATOR was an unfit agent. Despite 10 such knowledge, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 11 inclusive, negligently failed to supervise PERPETRATOR in his position of trust and authority as 12 an authority figure and supervisor of children, where they were able to commit wrongful acts 13 against Plaintiff. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 14 inclusive, failed to provide reasonable supervision of PERPETRATOR, failed to use reasonable 15 care in investigating PERPETRATOR and failed to provide adequate warning to Plaintiff of 16 PERPETRATOR’s dangerous propensities and unfitness. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL 17 DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, further failed to take reasonable measures to 18 prevent sexual assault, harassment, and molestation of children, including Plaintiff. 19 42. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that CARPINTERIA 20 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were put on notice, and knew 21 or should have known, that PERPETRATOR had previously engaged and was continuing to engage 22 in unlawful sexual conduct with children and committed other felonies, for his own personal 23 gratification, and that it was, or should have been foreseeable that he was engaging, or would 24 engage in illicit sexual activities with Plaintiff, and others, under the cloak of his authority, 25 confidence, and trust, bestowed upon him through CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL 26 DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, and each of them. 27 43. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis alleges, that CARPINTERIA 28 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were placed on actual or 12 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 constructive notice that, PERPETRATOR had assaulted children prior to, and/or during the time 2 he was in contact with Plaintiffs. Plaintiff is informed, and thereon alleges, that CARPINTERIA 3 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were informed of sexual 4 assault, harassment and molestations committed by PERPETRATOR or of conduct that would put 5 a reasonable person on notice of such propensity to assault, harassment and molestation. 6 44. Even though CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 7 500, inclusive, knew or should have known of these activities by PERPETRATOR, 8 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, did nothing 9 to investigate, supervise or monitor PERPETRATOR to ensure the safety of the guests. 10 45. As an institution entrusted with the care of minors, where staff, employees, agents, 11 and management, such as PERPETRATOR were placed in contact with minors, CARPINTERIA 12 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s expressly and implicitly represented 13 that these individuals, including PERPETRATOR, were not a sexual threat to children and others 14 who would fall under PERPETRATOR 's influence, control, direction, and guidance. 15 46. Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 16 500, inclusive, negligently failed to supervise PERPETRATOR in his positions of trust and 17 authority as an employee, agent, counselor and mentor, and/or other authority figure, where 18 PERPETRATOR was able to commit wrongful acts against Plaintiff. Defendants CARPINTERIA 19 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, failed to provide reasonable 20 supervision of PERPETRATOR. Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 21 and DOES 1 through 500 further failed to take reasonable measures to prevent sexual harassment, 22 molestation and assault of minors, including Plaintiff. 23 47. At no time during the periods of time alleged did CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 24 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, have in place a system or procedure to 25 reasonably investigate, supervise and monitor individuals in contact with minor children, including 26 PERPETRATOR, to prevent pre-sexual grooming and sexual harassment, molestation and assault 27 of children, nor did they implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward 28 13 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 minors, students and others in CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 2 through 500’s care. 3 48. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 4 inclusive, were or should have known to be aware and understand how vulnerable children were to 5 sexual harassment, molestation and assault by mentors, advisors, and other persons of authority 6 within CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive. 7 49. Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 8 500’s, inclusive, conduct was a breach of their duties to Plaintiff. 9 50. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 10 inclusive, breached their duty to Plaintiff by, inter alia, failing to adequately monitor and supervise 11 PERPETRATOR and stopping PERPETRATOR from committing wrongful sexual acts with 12 minors including Plaintiff. This belief is founded on the fact that employees and staff of 13 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, including 14 had suspected the assault was occurring at the time, and failed to investigate into the matter further. 15 Based on these facts, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 16 inclusive, knew or should have known of PERPETRATOR 's incapacity to supervise and stop 17 employees of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 18 inclusive from committing wrongful sexual acts with minors. 19 51. As a direct and proximate result of the failures of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 20 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue 21 to suffer the physical injury of childhood sexual assault, severe mental and emotional distress 22 including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical 23 manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and 24 loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer and were prevented and will continue 25 to be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will 26 sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have incurred and will continue to incur expenses 27 for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling; and loss of past and future 28 earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial. 14 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 2 NEGLIGENT RETENTION/HIRING 3 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 4 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500) 5 52. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior 6 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 7 53. By virtue of Plaintiff’s special relationship with Defendants, inclusive and each of 8 them, and CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s, inclusive, 9 relation to PERPETRATOR, CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 10 through 500, inclusive, owed Plaintiff a duty to not hire and/or retain PERPETRATOR, given his 11 dangerous and exploitive propensities, which CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 12 and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, knew or should have known had they engaged in a meaningful 13 and adequate investigation of his background prior to his hiring. 14 54. As an institution entrusted with the care of minors, where staff, employees, agents, 15 and management, such as PERPETRATOR was placed in contact with minors, CARPINTERIA 16 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, inclusive, expressly and implicitly 17 represented that these individuals, including PERPETRATOR, were not a sexual threat to children 18 and others who would fall under PERPETRATOR 's influence, control, direction, and guidance. 19 55. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that at no time during the 20 periods of time alleged did CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 21 500’s, inclusive, have in place a system or procedure to reasonably investigate, supervise and/or 22 monitor those individuals in direct contact with children, including PERPETRATOR, to prevent 23 pre-sexual grooming and/or sexual harassment, molestation and assault of parishioners, nor did 24 they implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward patrons and others in 25 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, inclusive, care. 26 56. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 27 inclusive, and each of them were or should have been aware and understood how vulnerable minor 28 children were to sexual assault, harassment and molestation by persons of authority, including 15 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 PERPETRATOR, within the control of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and 2 DOES 1 through 500, inclusive. 3 57. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, other children and/or 4 employees of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, 5 inclusive, complained of PERPETRATOR’s sexual improprieties prior to the sexual assault of 6 Plaintiff. Either CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, 7 inclusive, knew, or at the very least should have known of PERPETRATOR’s prior history of 8 sexual misconduct with minors prior to Plaintiff’s assaults. 9 58. Plaintiff is informed, and believes, and on that basis alleges, that the 10 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, were put on 11 notice, and should have known that PERPETRATOR had previously engaged and continued to 12 engage in unlawful sexual conduct with patrons and other felonies, for his own personal 13 gratification, and that it was, or should have been foreseeable that he was engaging, or would 14 engage in illicit sexual activities with Plaintiff, and others, under the cloak of his authority, 15 confidence, and trust, bestowed upon him through CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL 16 DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive. 17 59. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that CARPINTERIA 18 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500's, inclusive, were placed on actual and/or 19 constructive notice that PERPETRATOR had abused, harassed, molested and/or was molesting 20 minor children, both before his sexual assault, molestation and harassment of Plaintiff, and during 21 that same period. Plaintiff is informed, and thereon alleges, that other third parties, patrons, and/or 22 law enforcement officials informed CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 23 through 500, inclusive, of inappropriate conduct and molestations committed by PERPETRATOR. 24 60. Even though CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 25 500, inclusive, knew or should have known of these activities by PERPETRATOR, Plaintiff is 26 informed that CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 27 inclusive, failed to use reasonable care in investigating PERPETRATOR and did nothing to 28 16 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 investigate, supervise or monitor PERPETRATOR to ensure the safety of the other minor children 2 in his charge, including Plaintiff. 3 61. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500’s, 4 inclusive, conduct was a breach of their duties to Plaintiff. 5 62. As a direct and proximate result of the failures of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 6 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Plaintiffs have suffered and will 7 continue to suffer the physical injury of sexual assault, and severe mental and emotional distress 8 including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical 9 manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and 10 loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to suffer and were prevented and will continue 11 to be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will 12 sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have incurred and will continue to incur expenses 13 for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling; and loss of past and future 14 earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at the time of trial. 15 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 16 NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO TRAIN, WARN OR EDUCATE 17 (Against Defendants CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 18 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500) 19 63. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all prior 20 paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 21 64. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 22 inclusive owed Plaintiff a duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect Plaintiff and other 23 minor children in their charge from the risk of sexual assault, harassment and molestation by 24 PERPETRATOR by properly warning, training or educating Plaintiff and other minors about how 25 to avoid such a risk. 26 65. CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, 27 inclusive, breached their duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect Plaintiff and other 28 minor children in their charge, from the risk of sexual assault, harassment and molestation by 17 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 PERPETRATOR such as the failure to properly warn, train or educate Plaintiff and other minor 2 children in their charge about how to avoid such a risk. 3 66. Defendants breached their duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect 4 Plaintiff and other minor children in their charge from the risk of sexual harassment, molestation 5 and assault by PERPETRATOR, by failing to supervising and/or stop employees of 6 CARPINTERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, including 7 PERPETRATOR from committing wrongful sexual acts with minor children, including Plaintiff. 8 67. As a direct and proximate result of the failures of CARPINTERIA UNIFIED 9 SCHOOL DISTRICT and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue 10 to suffer severe mental and emotional distress including, but not limited to, great pain of mind and 11 body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss 12 of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life; have suffered and continue to 13 suffer and were prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities and 14 obtaining the full enjoyment of life; will sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity, and have 15 incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and 16 counseling; and loss of past and future earnings and other economic benefits according to proof at 17 the time of trial. 18 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 19 Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for Judgment against Defendants as follows: 20 1. For past, present and future general damage