Preview
COPY
IN THE COURT obleibommenveitias
SUMMIT COUNTY, 0
20IOHAY 2g AMIN: 27
SHERI STOWERS SCANTLIN, SUM SGN 2909-10.7665 i]
a \. “1U-
Plaintiff, CLERK OF COURTS
Vv. :
Judge Tom Parker
VIRTUAL HOLD TECHNOLOGY,
LLC, :
Defendant. ; DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO
PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED
COMPLAINT
Now comes Defendant Virtual Hold Technology, LLC, by and through its undersigned
counsel, and in answer to the Amended Complaint, herein admits, denies, and avers as follows:
AS TO THE PARTIES
1. Defendant admits that Plaintiff is a. natural person, but it otherwise denies the
remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint for lack of
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof.
2. Defendant admits that it previously employed Plaintiff in its office located in
Copley Township (with an Akron, Ohio address), Summit County, Ohio, but it denies the
remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint.
3. Defendant admits that it is a software technology company focused on providing
virtual queuing solutions designed to improve contact center operations and enhance the
customer experience. Defendant further admits it is incorporated in the State of Delaware and
that its offices in Akron, Ohio are located at 137 Heritage Woods Drive. Defendant otherwise
denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.COPY
4. Defendant admits that it is a “person” and “employer” as defined by Ohio Revised
Code 4112.01(A)(1) & (2).
5. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Amended
Complaint, including that it engaged in any wrongful acts or omissions as alleged by Plaintiff.
6. Defendant admits the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction and venue in this matter is
proper.
AS TO THE FACTS ALLEGED IN PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
7. Defendant admits it extended a written offer of employment to Plaintiff on
February 10, 2006 for the position of Trade Show Coordinator, and that Plaintiff commenced her
employment in this position on February 13, 2006. Defendant further admits that Plaintiff
worked from its Akron, Ohio office. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in
Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.
8. Defendant admits Plaintiff received a partial bonus and a cost of living increase
during the tenure of her employment with Defendant, but it denies the remaining allegations
contained in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.
9. Defendant admits that another employee of VHT inadvertently sent an
inappropriate email to Plaintiff on or about July 20, 2006, and that Plaintiff showed a copy of the
email to Defendant’s Director of Finance and Administration and complained that the email was
vulgar and sexually offensive. Further answering, Defendant states in a well-measured response
to the email, it counseled and disciplined the other employee; the other employee apologized to
Plaintiff for his act; and Plaintiff told the Director of Finance and Administration that the other
employee’s apology demonstrated his remorse. Defendant denies any remaining allegations
contained in Paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.COPY
10. Defendant denies for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
as to the truth thereof Plaintiff's allegation as to when she learned of her pregnancy. Defendant
further denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Amended
Complaint.
11. Defendant admits that Plaintiff took a trip to the Niagara Falls region in October,
2007 via a chartered bus with other employees of Defendant, including Wanda Munger, Jenni
Reiserer, Tina Ruggiero, Jennifer Young, and Nicole Minch, but denies the remaining allegations
contained in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
12. _ Defendant admits that it eliminated Plaintiff's position, and therefore her
employment, and that Plaintiff was notified of this decision in October, 2007. Defendant further
admits that Jenni Reiserer and Eric Ryan participated in the meeting during which Plaintiff was
notified of her termination, that Plaintiff was informed that her termination was not performance
related, and that Plaintiff was 40 years of age at the time of her separation. Defendant otherwise
denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs Complaint.
13. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs
Complaint.
14. Defendant admits that subsequent to Plaintiffs termination, it advertised
employment opportunities for the positions of “Technical Trainer” and “Marketing Intern.”
Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
15. Defendant admits that after Plaintiffs termination, some of the duties of her
former position were performed by other employees. Defendant further admits that the
employees who performed some of Plaintiffs former duties are younger than Plaintiff and, to
Defendant’s knowledge, were not pregnant at that time. Defendant otherwise denies theCOPY
remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
16. Defendant denies that it has ever denied any of its employees the opportunity to
return to work after maternity leave or that it otherwise discriminates against its employees on
the basis of sex or pregnancy. Defendant further denies the remaining allegations contained in
Paragraph 16 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
AS TO COUNT ONE: RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF THE OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS
ACT CHAPTER 4112 AND R.C, 4112.99
17. Defendant incorporates herein the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 16 as if fully
rewritien here.
18. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
19. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
20. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 20 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
21. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 21 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
22. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
AS TO COUNT TWO: GENDER DISCRIMINATION (PREGNANCY) IN VIOLATION
OF THE OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS ACT CHAPTER 4112 AND R.C. 4112.99
23. Defendant incorporates the foregoing Paragraphs | through 22 of this Answer as
if fully rewritten herein.
24. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 24 of Plaintiff'sCOPY
Complaint.
25.
Complaint.
26.
Complaint.
27.
Complaint.
28.
Complaint.
29.
Complaint.
30.
Complaint.
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
the
the
the
the
the
the
allegations
allegations
allegations
allegations
allegations
allegations
contained
contained
contained i
contained
contained
contained i
in
in
in
in
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 30
of Plaintiff's
of Plaintiff's
of Plaintiffs
of Plaintiff's
of Plaintiff's
of Plaintiff's
AS TO COUNT THREE: AGE DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE OHIO
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT CHAPTER 4112 AND R.C. 4112.99
31.
Defendant incorporates the foregoing Paragraphs 1 through 30 of this Answer as
if fully rewritten herein.
32.
Complaint.
33.
Complaint.
34.
Complaint.
35.
Defendant denies the allegations
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
Defendant denies
the
the
the
allegations
allegations
allegations
contained
contained
contained
contained
in
in
in
in
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 35
of Plaintiffs
of Plaintiff's
of Plaintiff's
of Plaintiff'sCOPY
Complaint.
36. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 36 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
37. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 37 of Plaintiff's
Complaint.
38. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief set forth in the prayer
for relief contained in Plaintiff's Complaint.
39. Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Plaintiffs Complaint not
specifically admitted herein to be true.
DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE AND OTHER DEFENSES
1. Defendant hereby asserts defenses to the claims raised in Plaintiff's Complaint,
which may include one or more affirmative defenses.
2. Plaintiff's allegations fail to state any claim upon which relief may be granted
against Defendant,
3. All or part of Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of election of remedies.
4. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statutes of limitations.
5. Plaintiff failed to act reasonably to mitigate the damages, which she alleges she
has suffered, so that her claim for monetary damages is offset by the amount she would have
earned had she acted reasonably to mitigate her damages.
6. All actions taken with respect to Plaintiff by Defendant were for good, just,
lawful, and legitimate cause and, therefore, Defendant is relieved from any liability or obligation
to Plaintiff arising from such actions.
7. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of waiver.COPY
8. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of
estoppel.
9. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of laches.
10. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of unclean
hands.
11. Plaintiff's claims are foreclosed and her damages limited by the after acquired
evidence doctrine.
12. Any and all actions of the Defendant were taken in good faith and were not
deliberate, intentional, willful, wanton, malicious, or reckless.
13. Any damages sustained by Plaintiff occurred because of her own acts or
omissions.
14. Defendant exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any
discriminatory behavior.
15. Plaintiffs claim for punitive damages is foreclosed because the Defendant has
undertaken reasonable measures to comply with all applicable statutes prohibiting unlawful
discrimination, retaliation and harassment in employment, and Defendant is not aware of any
unlawful discrimination directed at Plaintiff.
16. Plaintiffs request for a jury trial should be denied to the extent that her claim,
allegations, or requests for damages and relief do not allow for a right to a jury trial.
17. Plaintiff's claims are subject to the provisions and limitations of the Ohio Tort
Reform Act, Ohio Revised Code Section 2315.18 ef seq.
18. Defendant reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses as they
become known through discovery.COPY
WHEREFORE, Defendant further demands that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed at
her cost, and that this Court award such other and further relief, including reasonable costs and
attorneys fees, as may be deemed appropriate and just.
Respectfully submitted,
Sue Marie\Douglas (0017152)
Amy Ryder Wentz (0081517)
LITTLER MENDELSON
A Professional Corporation
1100 Superior Avenue, 20th Floor
Cleveland, OH 44114
Telephone: 216.696.7600
Facsimile: 216.696.2038
Email: sdouglas@littler.com
awentz(@littler.com
Attorneys for Defendant
Virtual Hold Technology, LLCCOPY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A true copy of Defendant’s Answer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint has been served
upon R. Benton Gray and Paul J. Corrado, Attorneys for Plaintiff, at 55 Public Square, Suite 900,
Cleveland, OH 44113, via First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on this 27 day of May, 2010.
\ hn ACL. due path
Amy Ryder Wentz
One of the Attorneys for Defendant
Virtual Hold Technology, LLC
Preview
COPY IN THE COURT obleibommenveitias SUMMIT COUNTY, 0 20IOHAY 2g AMIN: 27 SHERI STOWERS SCANTLIN, SUM SGN 2909-10.7665 i] a \. “1U- Plaintiff, CLERK OF COURTS Vv. : Judge Tom Parker VIRTUAL HOLD TECHNOLOGY, LLC, : Defendant. ; DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT Now comes Defendant Virtual Hold Technology, LLC, by and through its undersigned counsel, and in answer to the Amended Complaint, herein admits, denies, and avers as follows: AS TO THE PARTIES 1. Defendant admits that Plaintiff is a. natural person, but it otherwise denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof. 2. Defendant admits that it previously employed Plaintiff in its office located in Copley Township (with an Akron, Ohio address), Summit County, Ohio, but it denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint. 3. Defendant admits that it is a software technology company focused on providing virtual queuing solutions designed to improve contact center operations and enhance the customer experience. Defendant further admits it is incorporated in the State of Delaware and that its offices in Akron, Ohio are located at 137 Heritage Woods Drive. Defendant otherwise denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.COPY 4. Defendant admits that it is a “person” and “employer” as defined by Ohio Revised Code 4112.01(A)(1) & (2). 5. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, including that it engaged in any wrongful acts or omissions as alleged by Plaintiff. 6. Defendant admits the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction and venue in this matter is proper. AS TO THE FACTS ALLEGED IN PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 7. Defendant admits it extended a written offer of employment to Plaintiff on February 10, 2006 for the position of Trade Show Coordinator, and that Plaintiff commenced her employment in this position on February 13, 2006. Defendant further admits that Plaintiff worked from its Akron, Ohio office. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 8. Defendant admits Plaintiff received a partial bonus and a cost of living increase during the tenure of her employment with Defendant, but it denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 9. Defendant admits that another employee of VHT inadvertently sent an inappropriate email to Plaintiff on or about July 20, 2006, and that Plaintiff showed a copy of the email to Defendant’s Director of Finance and Administration and complained that the email was vulgar and sexually offensive. Further answering, Defendant states in a well-measured response to the email, it counseled and disciplined the other employee; the other employee apologized to Plaintiff for his act; and Plaintiff told the Director of Finance and Administration that the other employee’s apology demonstrated his remorse. Defendant denies any remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.COPY 10. Defendant denies for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof Plaintiff's allegation as to when she learned of her pregnancy. Defendant further denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 11. Defendant admits that Plaintiff took a trip to the Niagara Falls region in October, 2007 via a chartered bus with other employees of Defendant, including Wanda Munger, Jenni Reiserer, Tina Ruggiero, Jennifer Young, and Nicole Minch, but denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 12. _ Defendant admits that it eliminated Plaintiff's position, and therefore her employment, and that Plaintiff was notified of this decision in October, 2007. Defendant further admits that Jenni Reiserer and Eric Ryan participated in the meeting during which Plaintiff was notified of her termination, that Plaintiff was informed that her termination was not performance related, and that Plaintiff was 40 years of age at the time of her separation. Defendant otherwise denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 13. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 14. Defendant admits that subsequent to Plaintiffs termination, it advertised employment opportunities for the positions of “Technical Trainer” and “Marketing Intern.” Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 15. Defendant admits that after Plaintiffs termination, some of the duties of her former position were performed by other employees. Defendant further admits that the employees who performed some of Plaintiffs former duties are younger than Plaintiff and, to Defendant’s knowledge, were not pregnant at that time. Defendant otherwise denies theCOPY remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 16. Defendant denies that it has ever denied any of its employees the opportunity to return to work after maternity leave or that it otherwise discriminates against its employees on the basis of sex or pregnancy. Defendant further denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 16 of Plaintiff's Complaint. AS TO COUNT ONE: RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF THE OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS ACT CHAPTER 4112 AND R.C, 4112.99 17. Defendant incorporates herein the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 16 as if fully rewritien here. 18. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 19. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 20. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 20 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 21. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 21 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 22. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's Complaint. AS TO COUNT TWO: GENDER DISCRIMINATION (PREGNANCY) IN VIOLATION OF THE OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS ACT CHAPTER 4112 AND R.C. 4112.99 23. Defendant incorporates the foregoing Paragraphs | through 22 of this Answer as if fully rewritten herein. 24. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 24 of Plaintiff'sCOPY Complaint. 25. Complaint. 26. Complaint. 27. Complaint. 28. Complaint. 29. Complaint. 30. Complaint. Defendant denies Defendant denies Defendant denies Defendant denies Defendant denies Defendant denies the the the the the the allegations allegations allegations allegations allegations allegations contained contained contained i contained contained contained i in in in in Paragraph 25 Paragraph 26 Paragraph 27 Paragraph 28 Paragraph 29 Paragraph 30 of Plaintiff's of Plaintiff's of Plaintiffs of Plaintiff's of Plaintiff's of Plaintiff's AS TO COUNT THREE: AGE DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS ACT CHAPTER 4112 AND R.C. 4112.99 31. Defendant incorporates the foregoing Paragraphs 1 through 30 of this Answer as if fully rewritten herein. 32. Complaint. 33. Complaint. 34. Complaint. 35. Defendant denies the allegations Defendant denies Defendant denies Defendant denies the the the allegations allegations allegations contained contained contained contained in in in in Paragraph 32 Paragraph 33 Paragraph 34 Paragraph 35 of Plaintiffs of Plaintiff's of Plaintiff's of Plaintiff'sCOPY Complaint. 36. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 36 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 37. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 37 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 38. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief set forth in the prayer for relief contained in Plaintiff's Complaint. 39. Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Plaintiffs Complaint not specifically admitted herein to be true. DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE AND OTHER DEFENSES 1. Defendant hereby asserts defenses to the claims raised in Plaintiff's Complaint, which may include one or more affirmative defenses. 2. Plaintiff's allegations fail to state any claim upon which relief may be granted against Defendant, 3. All or part of Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of election of remedies. 4. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. 5. Plaintiff failed to act reasonably to mitigate the damages, which she alleges she has suffered, so that her claim for monetary damages is offset by the amount she would have earned had she acted reasonably to mitigate her damages. 6. All actions taken with respect to Plaintiff by Defendant were for good, just, lawful, and legitimate cause and, therefore, Defendant is relieved from any liability or obligation to Plaintiff arising from such actions. 7. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of waiver.COPY 8. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of estoppel. 9. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of laches. 10. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or part, by the equitable doctrine of unclean hands. 11. Plaintiff's claims are foreclosed and her damages limited by the after acquired evidence doctrine. 12. Any and all actions of the Defendant were taken in good faith and were not deliberate, intentional, willful, wanton, malicious, or reckless. 13. Any damages sustained by Plaintiff occurred because of her own acts or omissions. 14. Defendant exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any discriminatory behavior. 15. Plaintiffs claim for punitive damages is foreclosed because the Defendant has undertaken reasonable measures to comply with all applicable statutes prohibiting unlawful discrimination, retaliation and harassment in employment, and Defendant is not aware of any unlawful discrimination directed at Plaintiff. 16. Plaintiffs request for a jury trial should be denied to the extent that her claim, allegations, or requests for damages and relief do not allow for a right to a jury trial. 17. Plaintiff's claims are subject to the provisions and limitations of the Ohio Tort Reform Act, Ohio Revised Code Section 2315.18 ef seq. 18. Defendant reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses as they become known through discovery.COPY WHEREFORE, Defendant further demands that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed at her cost, and that this Court award such other and further relief, including reasonable costs and attorneys fees, as may be deemed appropriate and just. Respectfully submitted, Sue Marie\Douglas (0017152) Amy Ryder Wentz (0081517) LITTLER MENDELSON A Professional Corporation 1100 Superior Avenue, 20th Floor Cleveland, OH 44114 Telephone: 216.696.7600 Facsimile: 216.696.2038 Email: sdouglas@littler.com awentz(@littler.com Attorneys for Defendant Virtual Hold Technology, LLCCOPY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE A true copy of Defendant’s Answer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint has been served upon R. Benton Gray and Paul J. Corrado, Attorneys for Plaintiff, at 55 Public Square, Suite 900, Cleveland, OH 44113, via First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on this 27 day of May, 2010. \ hn ACL. due path Amy Ryder Wentz One of the Attorneys for Defendant Virtual Hold Technology, LLC