Preview
1 JML LAW
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
2 5855 TOPANGA CANYON BLVD., SUITE 300 12/15/2020
WOODLAND HILLS, CALIFORNIA 91367
3 Tel: (818) 610-8800
Fax: (818) 610-3030
4 JOSEPH M. LOVRETOVICH, STATE BAR NO. 73403
ERIC M. GRUZEN, STATE BAR NO. 222448
5 SHAHLA JALIL-VALLES, STATE BAR NO. 327827
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff
STEPHANIE SALAS
7
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO - HALL OF JUSTICE
11
STEPHANIE SALAS MORA, an Case No.: 20-CIV-05612
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12
individual;
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 COMPLAINT FOR:
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
Plaintiff,
14 1. SEX HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF
vs. GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940 ET SEQ. [FEHA];
2. RACE/NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION IN
15 VIOLATION OF FEHA;
3. HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF FEHA;
16
FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. 4. FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND
(Formally doing business as The Blue HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT
17 CODE § 12940 ET SEQ. [FEHA];
Door); and DOES 1 through 50, 5. CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN
18 inclusive; VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY.
19
Defendants.
20
21
22 Plaintiff, STEPHANIE SALAS MORA, hereby brings her complaint against the above-
23 named Defendants and states and alleges as follows:
24 PRELIMINARY ALLEGATIONS
25 1. At all times material herein, Plaintiff, STEPHANIE SALAS MORA (hereinafter
26 referred to as “Plaintiff”) was and is a resident of the State of California, County of Santa Clara.
27 2. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and based thereon alleges that, at all times material
28 herein, Defendant FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. (hereinafter “FOUNDAS
1
COMPLAINT
1 INVESTMENTS INC.”) was doing business in the State of California, County of Santa Clara
2 and was formally doing business as The Blue Door.
3 3. DOES 1 through 50, and each of them, were and are the shareholders, and/or
4 directors, and/or officers, and/or agents, and/or alter egos of Defendants, and in doing the things
5 herein described, were acting within the scope of their authority as such shareholders, and/or
6 directors, and/or officers, and/or agents, and/or alter egos of Defendants.
7 4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise
8 of DOES 1 through 50 are unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues these Defendants under said
9 fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes that each of the Defendants named as a DOE
10 Defendant is legally responsible in some manner for the events referred to in this complaint,
11 either negligently, willfully, wantonly, recklessly, tortiously, strictly liable, statutorily liable or
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 otherwise, for the injuries and damages described below to this Plaintiff. Plaintiff will in the
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 future seek leave of this court to show the true names and capacities of these DOE Defendants
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 when it has been ascertained.
15 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the
16 fictitiously named Defendants is responsible in some manner for, and proximately caused, the
17 harm and damages alleged herein below.
18 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the
19 Defendants named herein acted as the employee, agent, spouse, partner, alter-ego, joint
20 employer, and/or joint venturer of each of the other Defendants named herein and, in doing the
21 acts and in carrying out the wrongful conduct alleged herein, each of said Defendants acted
22 within the scope of said relationship and with the permission, consent and ratification of each of
23 the other Defendants named herein.
24 7. Finally, Defendants are liable for the acts of their employees under the doctrine of
25 respondeat superior and via conspiracy liability. Each of the acts described above and further
26 described below under each Cause of Action was perpetrated during the course and scope of
27 employment of the actors, was carried out with knowledge of Defendants, was condoned and
28
2
COMPLAINT
1 ratified, and/or was taken pursuant to an implied agreement by Defendants to deliberately take
2 said actions.
3 8. Hereinafter in the Complaint, unless otherwise specified, reference to a Defendant or
4 Defendants shall refer to all Defendants, and each of them.
5 9. The jurisdiction of this Court is proper for the relief sought herein, and the amount
6 demanded by Plaintiff exceeds $25,000.
7 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
8 10. In or about January 2018, Plaintiff Stephanie Salas Mora (“Salas Mora”) began
9 working for The Blue Door Restaurant in San Jose, California. The Blue Door is owned and
10 operated by Defendant FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. Plaintiff worked as a sever for the
11 restaurant.
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 11. Throughout her entire employment with Defendant, Everardo Andrade-Perez
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 (“Andrade-Perez”), Plaintiff’s Supervisor, sexually harassed Salas Mora. The harassment was
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 verbal, physical and visual.
15 12. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes that Andrade-Perez is employed as the head
16 chef and over the last several years has been employed in a supervisory capacity and is a
17 “Supervisor” within the meaning of FEHA.
18 13. The harassment occurred on nearly a daily basis and includes Andrade-Perez
19 grabbing, pinching, touching, kissing her on the cheek and or spanking or slapping Ms. Salas
20 Mora’s buttocks. This conduct was unwelcome, unwanted, and was objected to both verbally
21 and physically by Ms. Salas Mora by telling Andrade-Perez “no” or to “stop”, and pushing him
22 away repeatedly.
23 14. In addition to inappropriately touching Ms. Salas Mora, Andrade-Perez would
24 repeatedly whip her with a wet towel on the legs, buttocks, back and shoulder area which were
25 with such force that it would cause her to cry and left welts and bruises on her skin. Ms. Salas
26 Mora attempted to make him stop by pushing him away, avoiding him, telling him to stop, or
27 leave her alone, but this did not have any effect upon his conduct.
28
3
COMPLAINT
1 15. Andrade-Perez would give Ms. Salas Mora unwanted kisses on her cheek, he would
2 pinch her sides, he would corner her in certain areas of the restaurant in an imposing manner, and
3 pulled her hair to the point where it caused pain in her roots and scalp.
4 16. Andrade-Perez repeatedly made comments to Ms. Salas Mora about having sex with
5 her. Some examples of comments Andrade-Perez said to Ms. Salas Mora were:
6 Andrade-Perez would tell Salas Mora that her lips were “hella good” and how nice it
would be for her to perform oral sex on him.
7
Andrade-Perez would ask Salas Mora to show him her hands and he would comment
8 about how small they were and how they would look holding his penis.
Andrade-Perez would frequently ask Salas Mora to come over to his house to clean and
9
“pick up his dirty condoms.”
10 Andrade-Perez would ask Salas Mora to have threesomes with him.
Andrade-Perez would ask her “how much can I get for $20?” referring to sexual
11
intercourse as if she was a hooker or sex worker.
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 Andrade-Perez would ask other workers in the kitchen “what is she (Salas Mora) worth to
you?” or “How much would you pay for that?” referring to sexual intercourse with Salas
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 Mora.
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 Andrade-Perez solicited Salas Mora for sex on multiple occasions and would tell her that
“I would only need 30 minutes with you.”
15 Andrade-Perez offered Salas Mora money to have sex with him, she always refused.
16 17. Andrade-Perez also made inappropriate comments about Ms. Salas Mora’s Mexican
17 heritage, about her weight, facial features, breasts and buttocks.
18 18. Because of her repeatedly rebuffing has advances, Andrade-Perez became angry with
19 Ms. Salas Mora and repeatedly referred to her as “cascajo” which in Spanish means useless
20 trash, rubble, or something broken down. He would tell her she looked like a clown when she
21 wore make up and would tell her she looked ugly without make up.
22 19. Andrade-Perez would tell Ms. Salas Mora that if she had sex with the owner’s son she
23 may get a promotion or own the restaurant someday.
24 20. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that it was common knowledge
25 among the workers that Andrade-Perez would make inappropriate comments to Ms. Salas Mora
26 and other workers.
27 21. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Andrade-Perez
28 concurrently with his conduct directed at Ms. Salas Mora engaged in similar conduct with other
4
COMPLAINT
1 female workers but they were likewise afraid to complain. Ms. Salas Mora believes that Blue
2 Door knew or should have known of Andrade-Perez’ activities but took inappropriate action and
3 or no effective action to stop such action.
4 22. Ms. Salas Mora started working at Blue Door in January of 2018 and after 4 months
5 of harassment by Andrade-Perez, Salas Mora informed owner, Sylvia Foundas (“Foundas”), that
6 she left with no choice but to quit her employment because of the harassment by Andrade-Perez.
7 No action was taken in regards to the harassment by the owner.
8 23. However, due in part to a difficult financial situation and need for a job, in December
9 of 2018 Ms. Salas Mora went back to work at Blue Door out of desperation for a job.
10 Unfortunately, Andrade-Perez was still employed as the head chef and the harassment picked up
11 where it left off and continued to become worse.
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 24. The harassment continued as described above. Because of the severe nature of the
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 harassment, Ms. Salas Mora, despite her fears, ultimately went to the owner of Blue Door to
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 complain about Andrade-Perez. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes that an inadequate
15 investigation took place. Even after complaining Andrade-Perez continued to engage in further
16 inappropriate conduct.
17 25. Because of the significant distress these actions have caused and the refusal of
18 Defendant to take any corrective action, Ms. Salas Mora resigned from her job again in June,
19 2019.
20 26. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes that Blue Door knew or should have known
21 of the acts by Andrade-Perez, and did ratify the same, that Blue Door inadequately trained its
22 employees in sexual harassment, and tolerated and or created an atmosphere where harassment
23 was accepted and the male supervisors were free to do as they pleased. Salas Mora is informed
24 and believes that Blue Door failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment.
25 27. Throughout her entire employment with Defendant, Plaintiff was a victim of sexual
26 harassment and harassment by Defendant. Defendant continuously failed to remedy or prevent
27 the harassment and discrimination from continuing. As a result, due to the harassment that
28 Plaintiff had been subjected to during her employment with Defendant and the continuing failure
5
COMPLAINT
1 to prevent the harassment, Plaintiff resigned from her position at Defendant on or about June
2 2019 as she was no longer able to physical and emotionally tolerate the intolerable working
3 conditions.
4 28. Plaintiff further exhausted her administrative remedies by filing a complaint with the
5 Department of Fair Housing and Employment (“DFEH”) on December 11, 2020. The DFEH
6 issued Plaintiff an immediate right-to-sue letter on December 11, 2020.
7 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
8 SEX HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ. (FEHA)
9 (Against FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. and DOES 1 through 50)
10 29. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set
11 forth herein.
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 30. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 et seq., was in
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 full force and effect and was binding on Defendants, as Defendants regularly employed five (5)
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 or more persons. California Government Code § 12940(j) requires Defendants to refrain from
15 harassing any employee on the basis of their sex.
16 31. The sexually harassing conduct and harassing comments based on Plaintiff’s
17 gender/sex were severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable
18 person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive.
19 32. Defendants failed to take immediate appropriate corrective action. Defendants failed
20 to properly train its supervisors regarding how to handle sex/gender-based harassment and
21 complaints of sex harassment. Defendants failed to take reasonable action to prevent further
22 harassment from occurring.
23 33. The above said acts of Defendants constitute harassment based on sex in violation of
24 California Government Code § 12940 et seq.
25 34. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered
26 actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary
27 and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage
28 to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff
6
COMPLAINT
1 claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or
2 any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest.
3 35. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered and
4 continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well
5 as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon
6 alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in
7 the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial.
8 36. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been forced to
9 hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to
10 incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’
11 fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b).
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 37. Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 required Defendants’ managers, officers, and agents to prevent harassment based on sex against
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 and upon employees of Defendants. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized,
15 ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should,
16 therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against Defendants in an amount to be
17 established that is appropriate to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in such
18 conduct.
19 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
20 RACE/NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION
21 IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ.
22 [FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT (FEHA)]
23 (Against FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC., and DOES 1 through 50)
24 38. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by this reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully
25 set forth herein.
26 39. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 et seq., the Fair
27 Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), were in full force and effect and were binding on
28 Defendant and each of them, as Defendant regularly employed five (5) or more person
7
COMPLAINT
1 40. California Government Code § 12940(a) requires Defendants to refrain from
2 discriminating against any employee on the basis of race/national origin.
3 41. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to different terms and conditions of employment based
4 on Plaintiff’s known and/or perceived race, in violation of the FEHA. The acts created an
5 intimidating, oppressive, hostile, offensive and abusive work environment, which altered and
6 impaired Plaintiff's employment and emotional well-being.
7 42. Plaintiff is a Mexican female.
8 43. At all relevant times, Defendants perceived Plaintiff to be Mexican. At all relevant
9 times, Defendants perceived Plaintiff to be of Mexican national origin. Continuing throughout
10 Plaintiff’s employment with Employer Defendants, agents of Defendant subjected Plaintiff to a
11 barrage of discriminatory and harassing comments and adverse employment actions on the basis
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 of her known/perceived race and on the basis of her perceived national origin.
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 44. Defendants’ harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Employer
15 Defendants’ harassing conduct interfered with Plaintiff’s work performance and seriously
16 affected her psychological well-being. Plaintiff was deeply upset by this harassing conduct and
17 considered her work environment to be intimidating, hostile and abusive.
18 45. Employer Defendants failed to conduct a reasonable and good faith investigation of
19 Plaintiff’s complaint(s) of harassment, and failed to take reasonable action to prevent further
20 harassment from occurring. As a result, the harassment of Plaintiff continued. Furthermore,
21 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that during Plaintiff’s employment
22 with Employer Defendants, and other agents of Defendants harassed other employees on the
23 basis of their race and/or national origin.
24 46. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff
25 has suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation,
26 loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her
27 field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of
28
8
COMPLAINT
1 trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages pursuant to Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288
2 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest.
3 47. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff
4 has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and
5 embarrassment, as well as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and
6 believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional
7 suffering for a period in the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof
8 at the time of trial.
9 48. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff
10 has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected
11 to continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 recover attorneys’ fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b).
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 Employer Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 discrimination and harassment based on race and required Employer Defendants’ managers,
15 officers, and agents to prevent race/national origin discrimination against and upon employees of
16 Employer Defendants. However, Defendants chose to consciously and willfully ignore said
17 policies and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious,
18 oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff and the rights and duties
19 owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Defendants also had a pattern and practice of
20 discriminating against employees on the basis of their race/national origin. Each Defendant
21 aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful
22 conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages
23 against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each
24 Defendant and deter others from engaging in such conduct in the future.
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //
9
COMPLAINT
1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
2 HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ.
3 [FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT (FEHA)]
4 (Against FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC., and DOES 1 through 50)
5 49. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set
6 forth herein.
7 50. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940, et seq., was in
8 full force and effect and was binding on Defendants, as Defendants regularly employed five (5)
9 or more persons.
10 51. Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), Government Code §§
11 12940, et seq., it is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to harass an employee
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 because of an employee’s race, national origin or sex.
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 52. The conduct of Defendants, as herein described above, constitutes national origin
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 harassment and harassment based on race and sex in violation of California Government Code §
15 12940(j). The harassment complained of was sufficiently severe and/or pervasive so as to alter
16 the conditions of Plaintiff’s employment and create an abusive working environment.
17 53. Defendants’ harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work
18 environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Employer
19 Defendants’ harassing conduct interfered with Plaintiff’s work performance and seriously
20 affected her psychological well-being. Plaintiff was deeply upset by this harassing conduct and
21 considered her work environment to be intimidating, hostile and abusive.
22 54. Furthermore, Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that during
23 Plaintiff’s employment with Employer Defendants, and other agents of Defendants harassed
24 other employees on the basis of their race, national origin or sex.
25 55. Defendants’ aforementioned conduct caused Plaintiff to suffer severe emotional
26 distress.
27 56. The above-described acts of discrimination and harassment created an intimidating,
28 oppressive, hostile, offensive and abusive work environment, which altered and impaired the
10
COMPLAINT
1 conditions of Plaintiff’s employment and Plaintiff’s emotional well-being. Defendants’ conduct
2 was a concerted pattern of harassment of a repeated, routine and generalized nature.
3 57. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered
4 actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary
5 and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage
6 to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff
7 claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or
8 any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest.
9 58. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered and
10 continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well
11 as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial.
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been forced to hire
15 attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to incur
16 attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees
17 and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b).
18
19 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
20 FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT
21 IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ. (FEHA)
22 (Against Defendant and DOES 1 through 50)
23 59. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set
24 forth herein.
25 60. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 et seq. was in
26 full force and effect and was binding on Defendants. These sections impose on an employer a
27 duty to conduct a timely and good faith investigation of allegations of discrimination and
28
11
COMPLAINT
1 harassment, to take immediate and appropriate corrective action to end harassment and take all
2 reasonable steps necessary to prevent harassment from occurring, among other things.
3 61. Defendants failed to conduct a reasonable and good faith investigation of Plaintiff’s
4 complaints, and failed to take reasonable action to prevent further discrimination and harassment
5 from occurring. As a result, the discrimination and harassment of Plaintiff continued.
6 62. Defendants’ aforementioned conduct caused Plaintiff to suffer severe emotional
7 distress, including but not limited to anxiety, stress, and depression.
8 63. The above-described acts of created an intimidating, oppressive, hostile, offensive
9 and abusive work environment, which altered and impaired the conditions of Plaintiff’s
10 employment and Plaintiff’s emotional well-being. Defendants’ conduct was a concerted pattern
11 of harassment of a repeated, routine and generalized nature.
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 64. Defendants violated Government Code § 12940 (j) and (k) by failing to adequately
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 supervise, control, discipline, and/or otherwise penalize the conduct, acts, and failures to act as
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 described herein.
15 65. Defendants failed to fulfill its statutory duty to timely take immediate and appropriate
16 corrective action to end the discrimination and harassment and also failed to take all reasonable
17 steps necessary to prevent the discrimination and harassment from occurring.
18 66. In failing and/or refusing to take immediate and appropriate corrective action to end
19 the harassment, and in failing and/or refusing to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent
20 harassment from occurring, Defendants violated California Government Code § 12940 (j) and
21 (k), causing Plaintiff to suffer damages as set forth above.
22 67. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered
23 actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary
24 and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage
25 to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff
26 claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or
27 any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest.
28
12
COMPLAINT
1 68. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered and
2 continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well
3 as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon
4 alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in
5 the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial.
6 69. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been forced to
7 hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to
8 incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’
9 fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b).
10 70. Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and
11 required Defendants’ managers, officers, and agents to prevent discrimination and harassment
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 based on race, national origin or sex against and upon employees of Defendants. Each
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive
15 damages against Defendants in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish
16 Defendants and deter others from engaging in such conduct.
17 71. Furthermore, Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that
18 Defendants had a pattern and practice of discriminating against and/or harassing employees due
19 to their race, national origin or sex. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and
20 punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to
21 punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in such conduct.
22
23 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
24 CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN
25 VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
26 (Against Defendant and DOES 1 through 50)
27 72. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth at this
28 place.
13
COMPLAINT
1 73. The public policy of the State of California is designed to protect all employees and
2 to promote the welfare and well-being of the community at large. Accordingly, the actions of
3 Defendants, and each of them, in constructively terminating Plaintiff on the grounds alleged and
4 described herein were wrongful and in contravention of the express public policy of the State of
5 California. In this case, Plaintiff was constructively terminated as she could no longer continue
6 working in an environment of sexual harassment and discrimination.
7 74. Accordingly, the actions of Defendants, and each of them, in constructively
8 terminating Plaintiff on the grounds alleged and described herein, committed wrongful acts
9 which were in direct contravention of the express public policy of the State of California, to wit,
10 the policy set forth in Government Code §§ 12940, et seq., and the laws and regulations
11 promulgated thereunder, and as set forth in Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 167.
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 75. On or about June 2019, Plaintiff’s work environment had become so hostile
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 and intolerable that Plaintiff, acting as a reasonable person, had no choice but to resign. Plaintiff
15 alleges that Defendants’ conduct amounted to a wrongful constructive termination of Plaintiff.
16 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendants wrongfully
17 constructively terminated Plaintiff on the basis of complaints of sexual harassment and
18 retaliation.
19 76. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, and each of them,
20 Plaintiff has suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without
21 limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related
22 opportunities in her field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to
23 proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil
24 Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest.
25 77. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them,
26 Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and
27 embarrassment, as well as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and
28 believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional
14
COMPLAINT
1 suffering for a period in the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof
2 at the time of trial.
3 78. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them,
4 Plaintiff has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is
5 expected to continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is
6 entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs under Government Code § 12965(b).
7 79. Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and
8 required Defendants’ managers, officers, and agents to prevent sexual harassment and retaliation
9 against and upon employees of Defendants. Managers, officers, and/or agents of Defendants
10 were aware of Defendants’ policies and procedures requiring Defendants’ managers, officers,
11 and agents to prevent, and investigate sexual harassment and retaliation against and upon
5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300
12 employees of Defendants. However, Defendants chose to consciously and willfully ignore said
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
13 policies and procedures and therefore, Defendants’ outrageous conduct was fraudulent,
A Professional Law Corporation
JML LAW
14 malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff and the rights
Preview
1 JML LAW A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 2 5855 TOPANGA CANYON BLVD., SUITE 300 12/15/2020 WOODLAND HILLS, CALIFORNIA 91367 3 Tel: (818) 610-8800 Fax: (818) 610-3030 4 JOSEPH M. LOVRETOVICH, STATE BAR NO. 73403 ERIC M. GRUZEN, STATE BAR NO. 222448 5 SHAHLA JALIL-VALLES, STATE BAR NO. 327827 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff STEPHANIE SALAS 7 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO - HALL OF JUSTICE 11 STEPHANIE SALAS MORA, an Case No.: 20-CIV-05612 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 individual; Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 COMPLAINT FOR: A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW Plaintiff, 14 1. SEX HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF vs. GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940 ET SEQ. [FEHA]; 2. RACE/NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION IN 15 VIOLATION OF FEHA; 3. HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF FEHA; 16 FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. 4. FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND (Formally doing business as The Blue HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT 17 CODE § 12940 ET SEQ. [FEHA]; Door); and DOES 1 through 50, 5. CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN 18 inclusive; VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY. 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 Plaintiff, STEPHANIE SALAS MORA, hereby brings her complaint against the above- 23 named Defendants and states and alleges as follows: 24 PRELIMINARY ALLEGATIONS 25 1. At all times material herein, Plaintiff, STEPHANIE SALAS MORA (hereinafter 26 referred to as “Plaintiff”) was and is a resident of the State of California, County of Santa Clara. 27 2. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and based thereon alleges that, at all times material 28 herein, Defendant FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. (hereinafter “FOUNDAS 1 COMPLAINT 1 INVESTMENTS INC.”) was doing business in the State of California, County of Santa Clara 2 and was formally doing business as The Blue Door. 3 3. DOES 1 through 50, and each of them, were and are the shareholders, and/or 4 directors, and/or officers, and/or agents, and/or alter egos of Defendants, and in doing the things 5 herein described, were acting within the scope of their authority as such shareholders, and/or 6 directors, and/or officers, and/or agents, and/or alter egos of Defendants. 7 4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise 8 of DOES 1 through 50 are unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues these Defendants under said 9 fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes that each of the Defendants named as a DOE 10 Defendant is legally responsible in some manner for the events referred to in this complaint, 11 either negligently, willfully, wantonly, recklessly, tortiously, strictly liable, statutorily liable or 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 otherwise, for the injuries and damages described below to this Plaintiff. Plaintiff will in the Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 future seek leave of this court to show the true names and capacities of these DOE Defendants A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 when it has been ascertained. 15 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the 16 fictitiously named Defendants is responsible in some manner for, and proximately caused, the 17 harm and damages alleged herein below. 18 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the 19 Defendants named herein acted as the employee, agent, spouse, partner, alter-ego, joint 20 employer, and/or joint venturer of each of the other Defendants named herein and, in doing the 21 acts and in carrying out the wrongful conduct alleged herein, each of said Defendants acted 22 within the scope of said relationship and with the permission, consent and ratification of each of 23 the other Defendants named herein. 24 7. Finally, Defendants are liable for the acts of their employees under the doctrine of 25 respondeat superior and via conspiracy liability. Each of the acts described above and further 26 described below under each Cause of Action was perpetrated during the course and scope of 27 employment of the actors, was carried out with knowledge of Defendants, was condoned and 28 2 COMPLAINT 1 ratified, and/or was taken pursuant to an implied agreement by Defendants to deliberately take 2 said actions. 3 8. Hereinafter in the Complaint, unless otherwise specified, reference to a Defendant or 4 Defendants shall refer to all Defendants, and each of them. 5 9. The jurisdiction of this Court is proper for the relief sought herein, and the amount 6 demanded by Plaintiff exceeds $25,000. 7 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 8 10. In or about January 2018, Plaintiff Stephanie Salas Mora (“Salas Mora”) began 9 working for The Blue Door Restaurant in San Jose, California. The Blue Door is owned and 10 operated by Defendant FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. Plaintiff worked as a sever for the 11 restaurant. 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 11. Throughout her entire employment with Defendant, Everardo Andrade-Perez Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 (“Andrade-Perez”), Plaintiff’s Supervisor, sexually harassed Salas Mora. The harassment was A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 verbal, physical and visual. 15 12. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes that Andrade-Perez is employed as the head 16 chef and over the last several years has been employed in a supervisory capacity and is a 17 “Supervisor” within the meaning of FEHA. 18 13. The harassment occurred on nearly a daily basis and includes Andrade-Perez 19 grabbing, pinching, touching, kissing her on the cheek and or spanking or slapping Ms. Salas 20 Mora’s buttocks. This conduct was unwelcome, unwanted, and was objected to both verbally 21 and physically by Ms. Salas Mora by telling Andrade-Perez “no” or to “stop”, and pushing him 22 away repeatedly. 23 14. In addition to inappropriately touching Ms. Salas Mora, Andrade-Perez would 24 repeatedly whip her with a wet towel on the legs, buttocks, back and shoulder area which were 25 with such force that it would cause her to cry and left welts and bruises on her skin. Ms. Salas 26 Mora attempted to make him stop by pushing him away, avoiding him, telling him to stop, or 27 leave her alone, but this did not have any effect upon his conduct. 28 3 COMPLAINT 1 15. Andrade-Perez would give Ms. Salas Mora unwanted kisses on her cheek, he would 2 pinch her sides, he would corner her in certain areas of the restaurant in an imposing manner, and 3 pulled her hair to the point where it caused pain in her roots and scalp. 4 16. Andrade-Perez repeatedly made comments to Ms. Salas Mora about having sex with 5 her. Some examples of comments Andrade-Perez said to Ms. Salas Mora were: 6 Andrade-Perez would tell Salas Mora that her lips were “hella good” and how nice it would be for her to perform oral sex on him. 7 Andrade-Perez would ask Salas Mora to show him her hands and he would comment 8 about how small they were and how they would look holding his penis. Andrade-Perez would frequently ask Salas Mora to come over to his house to clean and 9 “pick up his dirty condoms.” 10 Andrade-Perez would ask Salas Mora to have threesomes with him. Andrade-Perez would ask her “how much can I get for $20?” referring to sexual 11 intercourse as if she was a hooker or sex worker. 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 Andrade-Perez would ask other workers in the kitchen “what is she (Salas Mora) worth to you?” or “How much would you pay for that?” referring to sexual intercourse with Salas Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 Mora. A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 Andrade-Perez solicited Salas Mora for sex on multiple occasions and would tell her that “I would only need 30 minutes with you.” 15 Andrade-Perez offered Salas Mora money to have sex with him, she always refused. 16 17. Andrade-Perez also made inappropriate comments about Ms. Salas Mora’s Mexican 17 heritage, about her weight, facial features, breasts and buttocks. 18 18. Because of her repeatedly rebuffing has advances, Andrade-Perez became angry with 19 Ms. Salas Mora and repeatedly referred to her as “cascajo” which in Spanish means useless 20 trash, rubble, or something broken down. He would tell her she looked like a clown when she 21 wore make up and would tell her she looked ugly without make up. 22 19. Andrade-Perez would tell Ms. Salas Mora that if she had sex with the owner’s son she 23 may get a promotion or own the restaurant someday. 24 20. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that it was common knowledge 25 among the workers that Andrade-Perez would make inappropriate comments to Ms. Salas Mora 26 and other workers. 27 21. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Andrade-Perez 28 concurrently with his conduct directed at Ms. Salas Mora engaged in similar conduct with other 4 COMPLAINT 1 female workers but they were likewise afraid to complain. Ms. Salas Mora believes that Blue 2 Door knew or should have known of Andrade-Perez’ activities but took inappropriate action and 3 or no effective action to stop such action. 4 22. Ms. Salas Mora started working at Blue Door in January of 2018 and after 4 months 5 of harassment by Andrade-Perez, Salas Mora informed owner, Sylvia Foundas (“Foundas”), that 6 she left with no choice but to quit her employment because of the harassment by Andrade-Perez. 7 No action was taken in regards to the harassment by the owner. 8 23. However, due in part to a difficult financial situation and need for a job, in December 9 of 2018 Ms. Salas Mora went back to work at Blue Door out of desperation for a job. 10 Unfortunately, Andrade-Perez was still employed as the head chef and the harassment picked up 11 where it left off and continued to become worse. 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 24. The harassment continued as described above. Because of the severe nature of the Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 harassment, Ms. Salas Mora, despite her fears, ultimately went to the owner of Blue Door to A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 complain about Andrade-Perez. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes that an inadequate 15 investigation took place. Even after complaining Andrade-Perez continued to engage in further 16 inappropriate conduct. 17 25. Because of the significant distress these actions have caused and the refusal of 18 Defendant to take any corrective action, Ms. Salas Mora resigned from her job again in June, 19 2019. 20 26. Ms. Salas Mora is informed and believes that Blue Door knew or should have known 21 of the acts by Andrade-Perez, and did ratify the same, that Blue Door inadequately trained its 22 employees in sexual harassment, and tolerated and or created an atmosphere where harassment 23 was accepted and the male supervisors were free to do as they pleased. Salas Mora is informed 24 and believes that Blue Door failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment. 25 27. Throughout her entire employment with Defendant, Plaintiff was a victim of sexual 26 harassment and harassment by Defendant. Defendant continuously failed to remedy or prevent 27 the harassment and discrimination from continuing. As a result, due to the harassment that 28 Plaintiff had been subjected to during her employment with Defendant and the continuing failure 5 COMPLAINT 1 to prevent the harassment, Plaintiff resigned from her position at Defendant on or about June 2 2019 as she was no longer able to physical and emotionally tolerate the intolerable working 3 conditions. 4 28. Plaintiff further exhausted her administrative remedies by filing a complaint with the 5 Department of Fair Housing and Employment (“DFEH”) on December 11, 2020. The DFEH 6 issued Plaintiff an immediate right-to-sue letter on December 11, 2020. 7 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 8 SEX HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ. (FEHA) 9 (Against FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC. and DOES 1 through 50) 10 29. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set 11 forth herein. 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 30. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 et seq., was in Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 full force and effect and was binding on Defendants, as Defendants regularly employed five (5) A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 or more persons. California Government Code § 12940(j) requires Defendants to refrain from 15 harassing any employee on the basis of their sex. 16 31. The sexually harassing conduct and harassing comments based on Plaintiff’s 17 gender/sex were severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable 18 person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. 19 32. Defendants failed to take immediate appropriate corrective action. Defendants failed 20 to properly train its supervisors regarding how to handle sex/gender-based harassment and 21 complaints of sex harassment. Defendants failed to take reasonable action to prevent further 22 harassment from occurring. 23 33. The above said acts of Defendants constitute harassment based on sex in violation of 24 California Government Code § 12940 et seq. 25 34. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered 26 actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary 27 and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage 28 to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff 6 COMPLAINT 1 claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or 2 any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 3 35. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered and 4 continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well 5 as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon 6 alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in 7 the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. 8 36. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been forced to 9 hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to 10 incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’ 11 fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 37. Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 required Defendants’ managers, officers, and agents to prevent harassment based on sex against A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 and upon employees of Defendants. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, 15 ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, 16 therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against Defendants in an amount to be 17 established that is appropriate to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in such 18 conduct. 19 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 20 RACE/NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION 21 IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ. 22 [FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT (FEHA)] 23 (Against FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC., and DOES 1 through 50) 24 38. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by this reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully 25 set forth herein. 26 39. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 et seq., the Fair 27 Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), were in full force and effect and were binding on 28 Defendant and each of them, as Defendant regularly employed five (5) or more person 7 COMPLAINT 1 40. California Government Code § 12940(a) requires Defendants to refrain from 2 discriminating against any employee on the basis of race/national origin. 3 41. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to different terms and conditions of employment based 4 on Plaintiff’s known and/or perceived race, in violation of the FEHA. The acts created an 5 intimidating, oppressive, hostile, offensive and abusive work environment, which altered and 6 impaired Plaintiff's employment and emotional well-being. 7 42. Plaintiff is a Mexican female. 8 43. At all relevant times, Defendants perceived Plaintiff to be Mexican. At all relevant 9 times, Defendants perceived Plaintiff to be of Mexican national origin. Continuing throughout 10 Plaintiff’s employment with Employer Defendants, agents of Defendant subjected Plaintiff to a 11 barrage of discriminatory and harassing comments and adverse employment actions on the basis 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 of her known/perceived race and on the basis of her perceived national origin. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 44. Defendants’ harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Employer 15 Defendants’ harassing conduct interfered with Plaintiff’s work performance and seriously 16 affected her psychological well-being. Plaintiff was deeply upset by this harassing conduct and 17 considered her work environment to be intimidating, hostile and abusive. 18 45. Employer Defendants failed to conduct a reasonable and good faith investigation of 19 Plaintiff’s complaint(s) of harassment, and failed to take reasonable action to prevent further 20 harassment from occurring. As a result, the harassment of Plaintiff continued. Furthermore, 21 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that during Plaintiff’s employment 22 with Employer Defendants, and other agents of Defendants harassed other employees on the 23 basis of their race and/or national origin. 24 46. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff 25 has suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, 26 loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her 27 field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of 28 8 COMPLAINT 1 trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages pursuant to Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 2 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 3 47. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff 4 has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and 5 embarrassment, as well as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and 6 believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional 7 suffering for a period in the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof 8 at the time of trial. 9 48. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff 10 has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected 11 to continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 recover attorneys’ fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 Employer Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 discrimination and harassment based on race and required Employer Defendants’ managers, 15 officers, and agents to prevent race/national origin discrimination against and upon employees of 16 Employer Defendants. However, Defendants chose to consciously and willfully ignore said 17 policies and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious, 18 oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff and the rights and duties 19 owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Defendants also had a pattern and practice of 20 discriminating against employees on the basis of their race/national origin. Each Defendant 21 aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful 22 conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages 23 against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each 24 Defendant and deter others from engaging in such conduct in the future. 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // 9 COMPLAINT 1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 2 HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ. 3 [FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT (FEHA)] 4 (Against FOUNDAS INVESTMENTS INC., and DOES 1 through 50) 5 49. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set 6 forth herein. 7 50. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940, et seq., was in 8 full force and effect and was binding on Defendants, as Defendants regularly employed five (5) 9 or more persons. 10 51. Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), Government Code §§ 11 12940, et seq., it is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to harass an employee 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 because of an employee’s race, national origin or sex. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 52. The conduct of Defendants, as herein described above, constitutes national origin A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 harassment and harassment based on race and sex in violation of California Government Code § 15 12940(j). The harassment complained of was sufficiently severe and/or pervasive so as to alter 16 the conditions of Plaintiff’s employment and create an abusive working environment. 17 53. Defendants’ harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work 18 environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Employer 19 Defendants’ harassing conduct interfered with Plaintiff’s work performance and seriously 20 affected her psychological well-being. Plaintiff was deeply upset by this harassing conduct and 21 considered her work environment to be intimidating, hostile and abusive. 22 54. Furthermore, Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that during 23 Plaintiff’s employment with Employer Defendants, and other agents of Defendants harassed 24 other employees on the basis of their race, national origin or sex. 25 55. Defendants’ aforementioned conduct caused Plaintiff to suffer severe emotional 26 distress. 27 56. The above-described acts of discrimination and harassment created an intimidating, 28 oppressive, hostile, offensive and abusive work environment, which altered and impaired the 10 COMPLAINT 1 conditions of Plaintiff’s employment and Plaintiff’s emotional well-being. Defendants’ conduct 2 was a concerted pattern of harassment of a repeated, routine and generalized nature. 3 57. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered 4 actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary 5 and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage 6 to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff 7 claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or 8 any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 9 58. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered and 10 continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well 11 as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been forced to hire 15 attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to incur 16 attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees 17 and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). 18 19 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 20 FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT 21 IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ET SEQ. (FEHA) 22 (Against Defendant and DOES 1 through 50) 23 59. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set 24 forth herein. 25 60. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 et seq. was in 26 full force and effect and was binding on Defendants. These sections impose on an employer a 27 duty to conduct a timely and good faith investigation of allegations of discrimination and 28 11 COMPLAINT 1 harassment, to take immediate and appropriate corrective action to end harassment and take all 2 reasonable steps necessary to prevent harassment from occurring, among other things. 3 61. Defendants failed to conduct a reasonable and good faith investigation of Plaintiff’s 4 complaints, and failed to take reasonable action to prevent further discrimination and harassment 5 from occurring. As a result, the discrimination and harassment of Plaintiff continued. 6 62. Defendants’ aforementioned conduct caused Plaintiff to suffer severe emotional 7 distress, including but not limited to anxiety, stress, and depression. 8 63. The above-described acts of created an intimidating, oppressive, hostile, offensive 9 and abusive work environment, which altered and impaired the conditions of Plaintiff’s 10 employment and Plaintiff’s emotional well-being. Defendants’ conduct was a concerted pattern 11 of harassment of a repeated, routine and generalized nature. 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 64. Defendants violated Government Code § 12940 (j) and (k) by failing to adequately Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 supervise, control, discipline, and/or otherwise penalize the conduct, acts, and failures to act as A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 described herein. 15 65. Defendants failed to fulfill its statutory duty to timely take immediate and appropriate 16 corrective action to end the discrimination and harassment and also failed to take all reasonable 17 steps necessary to prevent the discrimination and harassment from occurring. 18 66. In failing and/or refusing to take immediate and appropriate corrective action to end 19 the harassment, and in failing and/or refusing to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent 20 harassment from occurring, Defendants violated California Government Code § 12940 (j) and 21 (k), causing Plaintiff to suffer damages as set forth above. 22 67. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered 23 actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary 24 and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage 25 to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff 26 claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or 27 any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 28 12 COMPLAINT 1 68. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered and 2 continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well 3 as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon 4 alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in 5 the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. 6 69. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been forced to 7 hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to 8 incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorneys’ 9 fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). 10 70. Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and 11 required Defendants’ managers, officers, and agents to prevent discrimination and harassment 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 based on race, national origin or sex against and upon employees of Defendants. Each Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive 15 damages against Defendants in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish 16 Defendants and deter others from engaging in such conduct. 17 71. Furthermore, Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that 18 Defendants had a pattern and practice of discriminating against and/or harassing employees due 19 to their race, national origin or sex. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and 20 punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to 21 punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in such conduct. 22 23 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 24 CONSTRUCTIVE WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN 25 VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY 26 (Against Defendant and DOES 1 through 50) 27 72. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth at this 28 place. 13 COMPLAINT 1 73. The public policy of the State of California is designed to protect all employees and 2 to promote the welfare and well-being of the community at large. Accordingly, the actions of 3 Defendants, and each of them, in constructively terminating Plaintiff on the grounds alleged and 4 described herein were wrongful and in contravention of the express public policy of the State of 5 California. In this case, Plaintiff was constructively terminated as she could no longer continue 6 working in an environment of sexual harassment and discrimination. 7 74. Accordingly, the actions of Defendants, and each of them, in constructively 8 terminating Plaintiff on the grounds alleged and described herein, committed wrongful acts 9 which were in direct contravention of the express public policy of the State of California, to wit, 10 the policy set forth in Government Code §§ 12940, et seq., and the laws and regulations 11 promulgated thereunder, and as set forth in Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 167. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 75. On or about June 2019, Plaintiff’s work environment had become so hostile A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 and intolerable that Plaintiff, acting as a reasonable person, had no choice but to resign. Plaintiff 15 alleges that Defendants’ conduct amounted to a wrongful constructive termination of Plaintiff. 16 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendants wrongfully 17 constructively terminated Plaintiff on the basis of complaints of sexual harassment and 18 retaliation. 19 76. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, and each of them, 20 Plaintiff has suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without 21 limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related 22 opportunities in her field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to 23 proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil 24 Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 25 77. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them, 26 Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and 27 embarrassment, as well as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and 28 believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional 14 COMPLAINT 1 suffering for a period in the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof 2 at the time of trial. 3 78. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them, 4 Plaintiff has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is 5 expected to continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is 6 entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs under Government Code § 12965(b). 7 79. Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and 8 required Defendants’ managers, officers, and agents to prevent sexual harassment and retaliation 9 against and upon employees of Defendants. Managers, officers, and/or agents of Defendants 10 were aware of Defendants’ policies and procedures requiring Defendants’ managers, officers, 11 and agents to prevent, and investigate sexual harassment and retaliation against and upon 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 12 employees of Defendants. However, Defendants chose to consciously and willfully ignore said Woodland Hills, CA 91367 13 policies and procedures and therefore, Defendants’ outrageous conduct was fraudulent, A Professional Law Corporation JML LAW 14 malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff and the rights