Articles Posted in Sexual Harassment

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

25. At all times during the employment relationship, PLAINTIFFS performed their duties in a highly satisfactory, competent and diligent manner.

26. PLAINTIFFS have filed Charges of Discrimination with the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing ( DFE ), copies of which are incorporated herein by reference. Within one year of filing this complaint, the DFEH has issued a Right to Sue Notices authorizing this lawsuit, copies of which are incorporated herein by reference. PLAINTIFFS have exhausted their administrative remedies.

27. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, knowing and intentional discrimination against them, PLAINTIFFS have suffered and will continue to suffer pain and suffering, and extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress; PLAINTIFFS have suffered and will continue to suffer a loss of earnings and other employment benefits and job opportunities. PLAINTIFFS are thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial.

28. As a further, direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violation of California Government Code section 12900 et seq., PLAINTIFFS have been compelled to retain the services of counsel in an effort to enforce the terms and conditions of their employment relationship with Defendants, and have thereby incurred and will continue to incur legal fees and costs, the full nature and extent of which are presently unknown to them. PLAINTIFFS therefore request that attorneys’ fees be awarded pursuant to California Government Code section 12965.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Sexual Harassment in Violation of Gov’t. Code §12900 et seq., by All PLAINTIFFS and Against All DEFENDANTS)

21. PLAINTIFFS repeat and reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 20 and incorporates the same by reference as though fully set forth herein.

22. DEFENDANTS, and each of them, illegally discriminated against PLAINTIFFS by sexually harassing them during the course of their employment, in violation of the California Fair Employment & Housing Act, Gov’t. Code §12900 et seq. (hereinafter FEHA ), in that DEFENDANTS, and each of them, required PLAINTIFFS to wear sexually suggestive attire as a condition of employment; and/or it could be reasonably expected that if PLAINTIFFS wore the sexually suggestive attire, they would be subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment from customers or others; and/or that the requirement that PLAINTIFFS wear the sexually suggestive uniforms would essentially require them to become walking pornography in the workplace.

23. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and based thereon allege that DEFENDANTS, and each of them, cannot articulate any legitimate, business-related reason or bona fide occupational qualification to excuse their conduct.

24. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and based thereon allege that in addition to the practices enumerated above, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, may have engaged in other discriminatory practices against them which are not yet fully known. At such time as such discriminatory practices become known to them, PLAINTIFFS will seek leave of Court to amend this complaint in that regard.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

10. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 1 commenced employment with DEFENDANT STARS in or about April 1998 as a waitress. At no time was PLAINTIFF DOE 1 employed as a stripper.

11. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 2 commenced employment with DEFENDANT STARS in or about April 1998 as a waitress. At no time was PLAINTIFF DOE 2 employed as a stripper.

12. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3 commenced employment with DEFENDANT STARS in or about April 1998 as a waitress. At no time was PLAINTIFF DOE 3 employed as a stripper.

13. Upon the commencement of their employment, all PLAINTIFFS were instructed to wear a black skirt and white shirt of their choosing as proper work attire for waitresses. Thereupon, each PLAINTIFF selected an appropriate black skirt and white shirt to wear to work at Stars each day.

14. Shortly after the commencement of her employment with DEFENDANT STARS, PLAINTIFF DOE 1 was promoted from waitress to bartender. Thereafter, PLAINTIFF DOE 1 was promoted again, to assistant manager.

15. In or about September, 1998, Stars manager Bennie Brown informed PLAINTIFF DOE 1 that there would be no more women behind the bar, and that effective immediately, female employees would be eligible for positions only as waitresses or strippers. Thereupon PLAINTIFF DOE 1 was immediately demoted back to the position of waitress, where she earned less income and had less opportunity for advancement than in either the bartender or assistant manager position. After that time, all food servers at Stars, Sacramento Club were female, and all bartenders and management were male.

16. In or about September, 1998, all PLAINTIFFS were informed that they would no longer be permitted to wear to work the black skirt and white shirt of their choosing as they had previously worn. Instead, they would now be required to wear a very skimpy and demeaning uniform consisting of stretch hot pants that reveal substantial portions of the wearer’s naked buttocks and a tiny midriff stretch top which exposes all of the wearer’s stomach. PLAINTIFFS were informed that all waitresses would be required to wear this uniform from that point forward.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

First Amended Complaint for Damages for Sexual Harassment

THE PARTIES

1. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 1 ( PLAINTIFF DOE 1 ) was at all relevant times herein an individual female residing in the County of Sacramento.

2. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 2 ( PLAINTIFF DOE 2 ) was at all relevant times herein an individual female residing in the County of Sacramento.

3. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE 3 ( PLAINTIFF DOE 3 ) was at all relevant times herein an individual female residing in the County of Sacramento.

4. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and based thereon allege that DEFENDANT STARS, INC. ( DEFENDANT STARS ) was at all relevant times herein a corporation licensed to do business and conducting business in the State of California, and which owns an establishment known as Stars, Sacramento Club, which is a restaurant and gentleman’s club, i.e. a strip club located in Sacramento, California.

5. In the alternative, PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and based thereon allege that DEFENDANT STARS, INC., dba SAM, INC. ( DEFENDANT STARS ) was at all relevant times herein a corporation licensed to do business and conducting business in the State of California, and which owns an establishment known as Stars, Sacramento Club, which is a restaurant and gentleman’s club, i.e. a strip club located in Sacramento, California.

6. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and based thereon allege that DEFENDANT DAVID SMITH is an owner, officer, director and/or manager of Stars, Sacramento Club.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION BY ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS BASED UPON INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
104. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs1 through 87 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
105. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered and continue to suffer severe emotional distress, humiliation, loss of sleep and mental anguish all to her damage.
106. Defendants’ conduct, as set forth above, was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would result and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the consequences to Plaintiffs and was despicable, intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and severe emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with the knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would as a result increase and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs and the consequences to Plaintiffs. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of exemplary and/or punitive damages according to proof.
107. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of exemplary damages according to proof.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION BY ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST
DEFENDANT UCC BASED UPON RETALIATION
99. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs1 through 87 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
100. The acts and words of Defendant as alleged herein above constitute adverse employment action and/or retaliation against Plaintiffs, and Defendants violated Government Code § 12940 by retaliating against Plaintiffs because they opposed Defendants’ practices as described herein above.
101. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs suffered and continue to suffer general damages, including, but not limited to, severe emotional distress, as alleged herein in an amount according to proof.
102. Defendants’ conduct, as set forth above, was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would result and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the consequences to Plaintiffs and was despicable, intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and severe emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with the knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would as a result increase and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs and the consequences to Plaintiffs. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of exemplary and/or punitive damages according to proof.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION BY ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS BASED UPON HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT HARASSMENT
93. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs1 through 87 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
94. The acts and words of Defendants as alleged herein above constitutes harassment on account of Plaintiffs’ sex, race and/or national origin in the form of a hostile working environment and violated Government Code § 12940 by maintaining a hostile work place where such harassment occurred including harassment by Defendants’ officers, supervisors, managing agents, directors, and/or employees as evidenced by Defendants’ conduct and policies as herein above described.
95. As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ harassment of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs suffered damages as alleged herein in an amount according to proof.
96. Defendants’ conduct, as set forth above, was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would result and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the consequences to Plaintiffs and was despicable, intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and severe emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with the knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would as a result increase and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs and the consequences to Plaintiffs.
97. The conduct of Defendants as alleged herein above was despicable, willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of exemplary and/or punitive damages according to proof.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION BY ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT UCC BASED UPON EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
88. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs1 through 87 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
89. The acts and/or words of Defendant as alleged herein above constitute employment discrimination against Plaintiffs based upon Plaintiffs’ sex, race and/or national origin. Defendants violated Government Code § 12940 by discriminating against Plaintiffs because of Plaintiffs’ sex, race and/or national origin with respect to the terms and conditions of Plaintiffs’ employment.
90. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs suffered and continue to suffer general damages, including, but not limited to, severe emotional distress, as alleged herein in an amount according to proof.
91. Defendants’ conduct, as set forth above, was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would result and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the consequences to Plaintiffs and was despicable, intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing Plaintiffs to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and severe emotional distress. Defendants’ conduct was done with the knowledge that Plaintiffs’ emotional and physical distress would as a result increase and was done with wanton and reckless disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs and the consequences to Plaintiffs. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of exemplary and/or punitive damages according to proof.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

82. Defendant UCC and/or its agents and employees, supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors knew or should have known of the harassing actions on the basis of verbal and/or written reports of such actions made by Plaintiff to Defendant UCC’s supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors. Despite Defendant UCC’s actual and/or constructive knowledge of such harassing actions, Defendant UCC failed to take immediate and/or appropriate corrective action to stop the harassment. Furthermore, before the unlawful discrimination, harassment and retaliation occurred, Defendant UCC failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent such unlawful actions from occurring.
83. Defendant UCC also subjected plaintiff to discriminatory enforcement of company rules, arbitrary enforcement of rules, arbitrary write-ups, racially hostile comments, innuendos, and offensive and insulting remarks, unfair performance evaluations, contrived terminations, demotions, punishments and retaliation against Plaintiff for engaging in protected activity.
84. As a proximate result and legal cause of Defendant UCC’s conduct as alleged herein above, Plaintiff has been damaged in that Plaintiff has suffered the loss of wages, salary, benefits, and promotion, in an amount to be proven at time of trial.
85. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff was an excellent employees with an outstanding record of dedication, loyalty and efficient service and contribution to Plaintiff’s employer’s goal.

Continue Reading ›

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

74. Defendant UCC maintained and/or allowed a pattern and practice of unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation against female workers, including Plaintiff herein.
75. Defendant UCC directly and/or through its agents and employees, supervisors, managers, officers or directors, allowed Plaintiff to be subjected to unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation in that Plaintiff’s acceptance of sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation by Defendants, and/or its agents employees, supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors was an express and/or implied condition to the receipt of certain job benefits and was the cause of tangible detriment to Plaintiff.
76. Such discrimination and harassment also created a sexually hostile and/or offensive working environment for Plaintiff.
77. Plaintiff was led to believe by Defendant Paul Smith and David Smith that her employment opportunities at work would be enhanced by acceding to the sexually hostile remarks, innuendos, and offensive comments.
78. Plaintiff was obliged to work in an atmosphere which was hostile to females by virtue of unsolicited and unwelcome sexual remarks and/or innuendos, advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal and physical conduct of a sexual nature. The sexual harassment was sufficiently serious and pervasive to alter the conditions of Plaintiff’s employment and create a working environment which was intimidating, insulting, and abusive to female employees.

Continue Reading ›