arrow left
arrow right
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
  • Stinson, Molly vs Golden Feather Union Elementary School District(13) Unlimited Defamation document preview
						
                                

Preview

DAVID L. EDWARDS, (SBN 105638) LAW OFFICES OF DAVID L. EDWARDS P.O. Box 993506 F Superior Court of California F REDDING, CA 96099-3506 County of Butte | Telephone: (530) 221-0694 | L L Facsimile: (530) 592-3865 JUN 12 2017 E Email: de4214@gmail.com D D By » Deputy PATRICIA A. SAVAGE (SBN 236235) LAW OFFICES OF PATRICA A. SAVAGE 1550 Humboldt Road, Suite 4 Chico, CA 95928 Telephone: (530) 809-1851 Facsimile: (530) 592-3865 Email: psavesq@gmail.com ’ 10 Attorneys for Plaintiff, MOLLY STINSON 11 12 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE 14 15 MOLLY STINSON Case Wo: 17CV 01609 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 16 Vv. DEFAMATION PER SE 17 INTRUSION INTO PRIVATE GOLDEN FEATHER UNION AFFAIRS 18 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT and NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION DOES 1-20, inclusive. RETALIATION 19 FALSE LIGHT INVASION Defendants. OF PRIVACY 20 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF 21 EMOTIONAL DISTRESS NEGLIGENT INFLICTION 22 OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 23 24 PLAINTIFF MOLLY STINSON, (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “MS. STINSON”), 25 respectfully submits the instant Complaint for Damages against GOLDEN FEATHER UNION 26 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT (hereinafter “Defendant” or “GOLDEN FEATHER”) for 27 Damages and Demand for Jury Trial and alleges as follows: 28 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. PARTIES AND JURISDICTION 1 Plaintiff, MOLLY STINSON, was at all times relevant to this action, an employee of Defendant GOLDEN FEATHER UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT. 2. Defendant, GOLDEN FEATHER, was at all times relevant hereto, and is a publicly- funded school district located in Butte County, which provides or purports to provide a certain prescribed program of academic instruction to students in grades kindergarten through eighth residing within its attendance area. 3. Venue and jurisdiction are proper because the majority of the events giving rise to this action took place in Butte County; because GOLDEN FEATHER was doing business in Butte County; because PLAINTIFF STINSON’S employment was entered into in Butte County; 10 because PLAINTIFF STINSON worked for GOLDEN FEATHER in Butte County, because the 11 damages sought exceed the jurisdictional minimum of this Court; and because the majority of 12 witnesses and events occurred in Butte County. 13 4. PLAINTIFF STINSON is ignorant of the true names and capacities of the Defendants 14 sued herein as DOES 1 through 50. Defendants Does 1 through 50 are sued herein under 15 fictitious names pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 474. PLAINTIFF 16 STINSON is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that each Defendant sued under 17 such fictitious names is in some manner responsible for the wrongs and damages as alleged 18 herein. PLAINTIFF STINSON does not at this time know the true names or capacities of said 19 Defendants, but prays that the same may be inserted herein when ascertained. 20 5. At all times relevant, each and every Defendant was an agent and/or employee of each 21 and every other Defendant. In doing the things alleged in the causes of action stated herein, each 22 and every Defendant was acting within the course and scope of this agency or employment, and was acting with the consent, permission, and authorization of each remaining Defendant. All 24 actions of each Defendant as alleged herein were ratified and approved by every other Defendant 25 or their officers or managing agents. 26 6. PLAINTIFF STINSON submitted a timely complaint to the California Department of 27 Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”). The DFEH issued a Right-to-Sue Notice on 28 September 20" 2016. 2- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq Patricia A. Savage, Esq 7. Molly STINSON was the target of a series of malicious actions taken in retaliation for her making protected complaints about unlawful workplace activity, including gender based discrimination and harassment. Ms. STINSON's lawful complaints resulted in retaliatory actions toward her on behalf of GOLDEN FEATHER UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT, which created a hostile work environment. The hostile work environment had a severely negative impact on Ms. STINSON forcing her to quit her teaching position and seek new employment with the Paradise Union School District (Hereinafter “the Paradise District”). STATEMENT OF FACTS 8. As the Superintendent of the Schools for the GOLDEN FEATHER UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Joshua Peete had and has a duty to use due care in the 10 performance of his duties as Superintendent. Included in the legal duty to use due care by 11 Superintendent Joshua Peete is the duty to supervise the employees of the GOLDEN FEATHER 12 UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT. Further, at all times relevant hereto 13 Superintendent Peete had a duty to protect the private information that was stored on the laptop 14 computer used by Molly STINSON while she was an employee of the GOLDEN FEATHER 15 UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT, which was secured in Superintendent Peete’s 16 office. 17 9. Ms. STINSON was hired by Golden Feather in the year 2006 as a full-time multi- 18 subjects classroom teacher. Ms. STINSON received praise for her work from her supervisor and 19 colleagues, and received excellent evaluations during her tenure with GOLDEN FEATHER. 20 While she was a District employee, Ms. STINSON was issued a laptop computer by the 21 GOLDEN FEATHER DISTRICT, for her use as a classroom teacher. Ms. STINSON was 22 authorized to and did use the laptop computer to send and receive both professional and personal 23 email messages. Ms. STINSON was authorized to and did use the laptop computer to perform 24 Internet searches for both professional and personal reasons. 25 10. At the end of the 2012-2013 academic year, Ms. STINSON filed a grievance with the 26 GOLDEN FEATHER UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT, alleging that certain of 27 her co-workers, each of whom was then and remains a District employee, had undertaken certain 28 unprofessional actions against her. 3. Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. 11. Molly STINSON was the target of a series of malicious actions taken in retaliation for her making protected complaints about unlawful workplace activity, including gender based discrimination and harassment. Ms. STINSON's lawful complaints resulted in retaliatory actions toward her on behalf of GOLDEN FEATHER UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT, which created a hostile work environment. The hostile work environment had a severely negative impact on Ms. STINSON forcing her to quit her teaching position and seek new employment with the Paradise Union School District (Hereinafter “the Paradise District”). 12. Ms. STINSON resigned her employment with the GOLDEN FEATHER UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT effective July 1, 2016, and is currently employed by the Paradise District as a classroom teacher. Upon termination of her employment with GOLDEN 10 FEATHER, Ms. STINSON returned her laptop computer to Superintendent Peete. At which 11 time he assured her that he would secure the laptop computer under lock and key in his office 12 and that no person would have access to the laptop computer. Ms. STINSON informed 13 Superintendent Peete that she had private and personal email correspondence and internet 14 research on the laptop computer. Superintendent Peete reassured her that the contents of the 15 laptop computer would not be disclosed to any person and that no person would have access to 16 it. Based on the representations made to her by Superintendent Peete, as set out hereinabove, 17 Ms. STINSON had a reasonable expectation of privacy that the contents of her laptop computer 18 would be protected from unauthorized users, and she reasonably believed that no one at the 19 school would have access to the information stored on the laptop computer. Ms. STINSON 20 therefore left the laptop computer in the exclusive care, custody and control of Superintendent 21 Peete. 22 13. On or about August 6, 2016, Respondents breached their duty to Claimant by permitting 23 persons whose identity is unknown to Plaintiff to have access to her private laptop computer. As 24 a result of the negligence of Superintendent Peete in permitting such access to occur, 25 Respondents gained access to Superintendent Peete’s office where Ms. STINSON’s laptop 26 computer was stored. Respondents then gained access to the information stored in the laptop 27 computer by “hacking” into Ms. STINSON’s private email and the results of her internet 28 searches which were stored on the laptop computer. -4- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. 14. On or about August 18, 2016, August 19, 2016, and August 25, 2016, respectively documents called “Warning Notifications” were left in stacks of bright neon paper throughout public areas of the campus of Ms. STINSON’s workplace at the Paradise District. The “Warning Notifications” falsely accused Ms. STINSON of shameful and dishonest behavior. The “Warning Notifications” stated, of and concerning Ms. STINSON, that: “SHE PURCHASED POWDERED URINE SO SHE WOULD PASS THE DRUG TEST TO WORK WITH CHILDREN... **SHE CHEATED ON HER DRUG TEST**...MOLLY K. STINSON... THE NEW CCCS TEACHER... ***WARNING*** WARNING***.” The referenced “Warning Notifications” falsely portrayed Ms. STINSON’s character and integrity, and compromised her ability to continue to work with children as a teacher. The content of the “Warning 10 Notifications” constitute libel per se and have caused Ms. STINSON harm to her occupation and il reputation. Ms. STINSON has suffered extreme shame, and mortification as.a result of 12 Respondent’s unlawful conduct. The acts and/or omissions by Respondents, and each of them, 13 include but are not limited to Defamation, Negligent Supervision, Negligent Infliction of 14 Emotional Distress, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Defamation, False Light 15 Invasion of Privacy, and Negligent Intrusion into Private Affairs. 16 15. STINSON served a Government Tort Claim on the governing body of the Defendant 17 GOLDEN FEATHER. On January 19, 2017, The GOLDEN FEATHER UNION 18 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISCTRICT served notice to STINSON that her claim was rejected. 19 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 20 DEFAMATION PER SE 21 16. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and incorporated by 22 reference. 23 17. As the employer, GOLDEN FEATHER is directly responsible for the wrongful acts of its 24 employees and/or agents, including Superintendent Peete, who were acting within the course and 25 scope of their employment with the GOLDEN FEATHER district at the time each of them 26 committed the negligent and intentional acts and/or omissions, as alleged herein. 27 28 -5- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. 18. On or about August 18, 2016, August 19, 2016, and August 25, 2016, respectively, documents called “Warning Notifications” were left in stacks of bright neon paper throughout public areas of the campus of Ms. STINSON’s workplace at the Paradise District. The “Warning Notifications” falsely accused Ms. STINSON of shameful and dishonest behavior. The “Warning Notifications” stated, of and concerning Ms. STINSON, that: “SHE PURCHASED POWDERED URINE SO SHE WOULD PASS THE DRUG TEST TO WORK WITH CHILDREN... **SHE CHEATED ON HER DRUG TEST**... MOLLY K. STINSON... THE NEW CCCS TEACHER... ***WARNING*** WARNING***.” 19. Anyone and everyone who read the “Warning notifications” would have known or had reason to know that the published statements were about Molly STINSON because the papers said 10 Molly K. STINSON “The new CCCS teacher” directly on their face. 11 20. The referenced “Warning Notifications” falsely portrayed Ms. STINSON’s character and 12 integrity, and compromised her ability to continue to work with children as a teacher. Attached to 13 the warning notifications were copies of emails from STINSON’s laptop, which had been under 14 lock and key in the possession of Defendant. Defendant failed to use reasonable care to determine 15 the truth or falsity of the matter, and as a result of its unlawful conduct Ms. STINSON has 16 suffered harm to her occupation and reputation. 17 21. The above described actions were perpetrated and/or ratified by a managing agent or 18 officer of Defendant. These acts were done with malice, fraud, oppression, and in reckless 19 disregard of PLAINTIFF STINSON’S rights. Further, said actions were despicable in character 20 and warrant the imposition of punitive damages in a sum sufficient to punish and deter 21 Defendant’s future conduct. 22 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 23 INTRUSION INTO PRIVATE AFFAIRS 24 22. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and incorporated by 25 reference. 26 23. Atall times relevant MOLLY STINSON had a right to privacy with regards to her 27 personal email account. GOLDEN FEATHER intruded into STINSON’s private email account 28 -6- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. we through a laptop computer that was under lock and key in the possession of Superintendent Peete at GOLDEN FEATHER’s Concow Elementary location. 24. STINSON had a reasonable expectation of privacy in her personal email account. A special password was required to gain entry into STINSON’s private email, and at no time was GOLDEN FEATHER or any of its agents or directors given permission to access STINSON’s private email account. 25. GOLDEN FEATHER’S intrusion into STINSON’s email was intentional, and done with complete disregard for STINSON’ right to privacy. 26. Any reasonable person would consider GOLDEN FEATHER’: intrusion highly offensive. As a result of GOLDEN FEATHER’ intrusion into Plaintiffs personal email 10 account, STINSON has been harmed and GOLDEN FEATHER’s conduct is a substantial factor 11 in causing STINSON’S harm. 12 13 27. The above described actions were perpetrated and/or ratified by a managing agent or officer of Defendant. These acts were done with malice, fraud, oppression, and in reckless 14 disregard of PLAINTIFF STINSON’S rights. Further, said actions were despicable in character 15 and warrant the imposition of punitive damages in a sum sufficient to punish and deter 16 Defendant’s future conduct. 17 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 18 NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 19 28. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and incorporated by 20 reference. 21 29. As the employer, GOLDEN FEATHER is directly responsible for the wrongful acts of its 22 employees and/or agents, including Superintendent Peete, who were acting within the course and scope of their employment with the GOLDEN FEATHER district at the time each of them 24 committed the negligent and intentional acts and/or omissions, as alleged herein. 25 30. Peete knew that STINSON used the laptop for both professional and personal use. Peete 26 reassured STINSON that he would secure the laptop computer under lock and key in his office and 27 the contents of the laptop computer would not be disclosed to any person and that no person would 28 “Te Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. have access to it. On or about August 6, 2016, Defendant’s breached their duty to Plaintiff by the negligence of Superintendent Peete when he permitted persons whose identity is unknown to Plaintiff to have access to STINSON’s laptop computer and allowing entry into STINSON’s private email account. 31. Superintendent Peete’s negligence has caused damages to STINSON in a sum according to proof. i I i FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION RETALIATION | 32. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and keincorporated by 10 reference. 11 33. At all times relevant to this action, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) 12 and California Government Code Sections 12940 et seq., were in full force and effect and binding on Defendant. The statements and conduct on the part of the Defendant complained of 13 herein represent a violation of FEHA, as codified in California Government Codes Section 14 12940 et seq. 15 34. Atall relevant times herein, Plaintiff engaged in a protected activity by complaining 16 about gender based harassment and discrimination which included being ridiculed in front of her 17 students and mistreated when STINSON asked for help. | 18 | 35. STINSON filed a grievance and made several complaints with GOLDEN FEATHER 19 regarding the gender based harassment. As a consequence, STINSON and her co-workers were 20 called into a sit-down meeting with the then Principal (Greg Blake) and head teacher (Donna 21 Mortimer) where it was agreed that the harassment would stop. STINSONS’s activities were 22 protected activities pursuant to Government Code Section 12940(h) and Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations Section 11021. 24 36. However, the harassment did not stop but continued to escalate forcing STINSON to 25 quit her employment with GOLDEN FEATHER on or about July 1, 2016. 26 37. On or about August 2016, STINSON began new employment with the Paradise District 27 as acclassroom teacher. On or about August 18, 2016, August 19, 2016, and August 25, 2016, 28 -8- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq respectively documents called “Warning Notifications” were left in stacks of bright neon paper throughout public areas of the campus of Ms. STINSON’s workplace at the Paradise District. 38. The “Warning Notifications” falsely accused Ms. STINSON of shameful and dishonest behavior. The “Warning Notifications” falsely portrayed Ms. STINSON’s character and integrity, and compromised her ability to continue to work with children as a teacher. The “Warning Notifications” were undertaken in an ongoing series of actions which constitute retaliation for Plaintiffs protected activities in complaining about gender based discrimination in violation of Government Code Section 12940 et cet. 39. Plaintiff's protected activities were a motivating reason for Defendant’s decision to allow Defendant’s agents and employees access to Plaintiff's laptop which resulted in the 10 “Warning Notifications” in Plaintiff's new place of employment. 11 40. Plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress because of Defendant’s actions. 12 41. Defendant’s retaliatory conduct was a substantial factor in’ the causing harm to 13 Plaintiff. 14 42. As a proximate result of the aforementioned violations, Plaintiff has been damaged in 15 an amount according to proof, but in an amount in excess of the jurisdiction of this Court. 16 Plaintiff also seeks “affirmative relief” or “prospective relief” as defined by Government Code 17 §12926(a), including back pay, reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses, expungement of records 18 and any such other relief to correct Defendant’s unlawful practices that this Court deems proper. 19 43. The above-described actions were perpetrated and/or ratified by a managing agent or 20 officer of Defendant. These acts were done with malice, fraud, oppression, and in reckless 21 disregard of Plaintiff's rights. Further, said actions were despicable in character and warrant the 22 imposition of punitive damages in a sum sufficient to punish and deter Defendants future conduct. 23 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 24 FALSE LIGHT INVASION OF PRIVACY 25 44. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and incorporated by 26 reference. 27 45. On or about August 18, 2016, August 19, 2016, and August 25, 2016, respectively, 28 documents called “Warning Notifications” were left in stacks of bright neon paper throughout -9- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. ~ i public areas of the campus of Ms. STINSON’s workplace at the PARADISE DISTRICT. The “Warning Notifications” falsely accused Ms. STINSON of shameful and dishonest behavior, which portrayed STINSON ina false light. | 46. The malicious false light created by the publication has caused damage to STINSON’s reputation and occupation as a teacher of children. STINSON has had to hire an attorney to help protect her rights. A reasonable person in STINSON’s position would behighly offended. 47. GOLDEN FEATHER acted with complete disregard for the truth as it knew that the publication would be detrimental to STINSON and would create a false impression about her. | 48. GOLDEN FEATHER’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing STINSON’s harm. 10 The above described actions were perpetrated and/or ratified by a managing agent or officer of il Defendant. These acts were done with malice, fraud, oppression, and in reckless disregard of | PLAINTIFF STINSON’S rights. Further, said actions were despicable in character and warrant 12 the imposition of punitive damages in a sum sufficient to punish and deter | Defendant’s future 13 | conduct. 14 1S SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 16 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 17 49. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and incorporated by reference. | 18 | 50. Defendants GOLDEN FEATHER and DOES 1 through 20 and each of them, intended to 19 harm STINSON by placing defamatory publications around her new place of employment. 20 GOLDEN FEATHER’s conduct was so outrageous, that it threatened Plaintiff's integrity, 21 reputation, and compromised Plaintiff’s ability to work with children. 1 22 51. Asa result of Defendant’s conduct STINSON suffered humiliation, mortification embarrassment, sleep loss, anguish, and depression. GOLDEN FEATHER’s conduct was a 24 substantial factor in causing Plaintiff's emotional distress. 25 52. The above described actions were perpetrated and/or ratified by amanaging agent or 26 officer of Defendant. These acts were done with malice, fraud, oppression, and in reckless 27 disregard of PLAINTIFF STINSON’S rights. Further, said actions were despicable in character 28 -10- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. Patricia A. Savage, Esq. N, ~ and warrant the imposition of punitive damages in a sum sufficient to punish and deter Defendant’s future conduct. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 53. The allegations set forth in this Complaint are hereby re-alleged and incorporated by reference. 54. As the employer, GOLDEN FEATHER is directly responsible for the wrongful acts of its employees and/or agents, including Superintendent Peete, who were acting within the course and scope of their employment with GOLDEN FEATHER at the time each of them committed 10 the negligent acts and/or omissions, as alleged herein. il 55. GOLDEN FEATHER was negligent when it permitted its employees to unlawfully 12 access STINSON’s private email account and publish defamatory notifications all over STINSON’s new place of employment. 13 56. GOLDEN FEATHER’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing STINSON’s harm 14 and as a result of GOLDEN FEATHER’s negligent conduct, STINSON suffered severe 15 emotional distress such as humiliation, mortification, embarrassment, sleep loss, anguish, and 16 depression. 17 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 18 19 Wherefore, PLAINTIFF STINSON demands judgment against Defendant and any other 20 defendants who may be later added to this action as follows: 21 1 For compensatory damages, including, but not limited to lost wages and 22 emotional distress in the amount according to proof; 23 2. For attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to all applicable Statues or legal principles; 24 3 For cost of suit incurred; 25 4. For punitive damages or other penalties recoverable by law; 26 5 For prejudgment interest on all amounts claimed pursuant to Civil Code section 27 3287 and/or 3288; and 28 6 For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper. -l- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq Patricia A. Savage, Esq, ae Dated: June 12, 2017 By DAVID A {/ ARD PATRICM AVAGE, ESQ. Attorneys for PLAINTIFF STINSON 1 4 10 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL | PLAINTIFF STINSON hereby demands trial by jury for this matter. | i 12 13 Dated: June 12, 2017 By if éP>< DAVID IRDS, ESQ 14 PATRICIA AGE, ESQ. Attorneys for PLAINTIFF STINSON 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -j2- Complaint for Damages David L. Edwards, Esq. PatriciaA. Savage, Esq.