VARGAS v. TESLA MOTORS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, et al. Document 1: Document

Superior Court of California, County of Alameda
Case No. 23CV037419
Filed June 30, 2023

Summons on Complaint Issued and Filed by: Margarita Vargas (Plaintiff) As to: Tesla Motors, Inc., a Delaware corporation (Defendant); Tesla, Inc., a Delaware corporation (Defendant); Volt Information Sciences, Inc., a New York corporation (Defendant) et al.

BackBack to VARGAS v. TESLA MOTORS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, et al.

Tags No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.

  Formatted Text Tab Overlap Raw Text Right End
Page 1
Ramin R. Younessi, Esq. (SBN 175020)
LAW OFFICES OF RAMIN R. YOUNESSI
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite Los Angeles, California Telephone: (213) 480-Facsimile: (213) 480-Attorney for Plaintiff,
MARGARITA VARGAS

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, HAYWARD HALL OF JUSTICE

MARGARITA VARGAS, an individual,
Plaintiff,

Case No.
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR:
v.
1. DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF
GOV’T CODE §§12940 ET SEQ.;
TESLA MOTORS, INC., a Delaware
corporation; TESLA, INC., a Delaware
corporation; VOLT INFORMATION
SCIENCES, INC., a New York corporation;
VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP., a Delaware
corporation; ANDREW DOE, an individual;
PEDRO DOE, an individual; KAI DOE, an
individual; MONA DOE, an individual; and
DOES 1 through 20, inclusive,
Defendants.
2. HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF
GOV’T CODE §§12940 ET SEQ.;
3. RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF
GOV’T CODE §§12940 ET SEQ.;
4. FAILURE TO PREVENT
DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT AND
RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF
GOV’T CODE §12940(k);

5. FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT;

6. BATTERY;

7. ASSAULT;

8. SEXUAL BATTERY (CIVIL CODE
§1708.5);

9. GENDER VIOLENCE (CIVIL CODE §
52.4);
10. VIOLATION OF THE RALPH CIVIL
RIGHTS ACT (CIVIL CODE §51.7);
11. VIOLATION OF THE TOM BANE CIVIL
RIGHTS ACT (CIVIL CODE §52.1);
-1COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 2
12. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND
RETENTION;

13. WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN
VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY

14. FAILURE TO PAY WAGES (CAL. LABOR
CODE §§201, 1194);

15. FAILURE TO PROVIDE REST PERIODS
(CAL. LABOR CODE §§226.7);

16. FAILURE TO PROVIDE ITEMIZED
WAGE AND HOUR STATEMENTS (CAL.
LABOR CODE §§226, ET SEQ.);

17. WAITING TIME PENALTIES (CAL.
LABOR CODE §§201-203); AND

18. UNFAIR COMPETITION (BUS. & PROF.
CODE §17200 ET SEQ.);

DEMAND OVER $25,
[DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL]
COMES NOW PLAINTIFF, MARGARITA VARGAS, and for causes of action against the
Defendants and each of them, alleges as follows:
JURISDICTION

1.
This Court is the proper court, and this action is properly filed in Alameda County, because

Defendants’ obligations and liability arise therein, because Defendants maintain offices and transact

business within Alameda County, and because the work that is the subject of this action was performed

by Plaintiff in Alameda County.
THE PARTIES

2.
Plaintiff, MARGARITA VARGAS, is and at all times relevant hereto was a resident of
the County of Alameda, State of California.
3.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant
hereto, Defendant TESLA MOTORS, INC. (hereinafter referred to as “TESLA MOTORS”) was and is
-2COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 3
a Delaware corporation doing business at 45500 Fremont Blvd., in the City of Fremont, in the County of

Alameda, State of California.
4.

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant

hereto, Defendant TESLA, INC. (hereinafter referred to as “TESLA”) was and is a Delaware corporation

doing business at 45500 Fremont Blvd., in the City of Fremont, in the County of Alameda, State of

California.
5.

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant

hereto, Defendant VOLT INFORMATION SCIENCES, INC. (hereinafter referred to as “VOLT

INFORMATION”) was and is a New York corporation doing business at 45500 Fremont Blvd., in the

City of Fremont, in the County of Alameda, State of California.
6.

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant

hereto,

MANAGEMENT”) was and is a Delaware corporation doing business at 45500 Fremont Blvd., in the

City of Fremont, in the County of Alameda, State of California.

Defendant
7.
VOLT
MANAGEMENT
CORP.
(hereinafter
referred
to
as
“VOLT
Defendants TESLA MOTORS, TESLA, VOLT INFORMATION, and VOLT
MANAGEMENT are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Employers.”
8.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant
hereto, Employers owned and operated a private automobile manufacturing and finishing plant.
9.
At all times relevant herein, Employers and DOES 1-20 were Plaintiff’s employers, joint

employers and/or special employers within the meaning of Government Code §§12926, subdivision (d),

12940, subdivisions (a),(h),(1), (h)(3)(A), and (i), and 12950, and regularly employ five (5) or more

persons and are therefore subject to the jurisdiction of this Court.

10.
At all times relevant herein, Employers and DOES 1-20 were Plaintiff’s employers, joint

employers and/or special employers within the meaning of the Labor Code and Industrial Welfare

Commission Order No. 1-2001 and are each an “employer or other person acting on behalf of an

employer” as such term is used in Labor Code section 558, and liable to Plaintiff on that basis.

11.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant
hereto, Defendants ANDREW DOE, PEDRO DOE, KAI DOE AND MONA DOE, were and are
-3COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 4
individual residents of the County of Alameda, State of California, and are hereinafter individually

referred to by their name and collectively referred to as the “Individual Defendants.” The Individual

Defendants were Employers’ managers, corporate agents, supervisors, and/or employees.

12.
Individual Defendants
and Employers are collectively referred to hereinafter
interchangeably as “Employers” or “Defendants”.
13.
The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of

the Defendants named herein as DOES 1-20, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff at this time and therefore

said Defendants are sued by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave to amend this complaint to

insert the true names and capacities of said Defendants when the same become known to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that each of the fictitiously named

Defendants is responsible for the wrongful acts alleged herein, and is therefore liable to Plaintiff as

alleged hereinafter.

14.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that at all times relevant

hereto, Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, employees, managing agents, supervisors,

coconspirators, parent corporation, joint employers, alter egos, successors, and/or joint ventures of the

other Defendants, and each of them, and in doing the things alleged herein, were acting at least in part

within the course and scope of said agency, employment, conspiracy, joint employer, alter ego status,

successor status and/or joint venture and with the permission and consent of each of the other Defendants.

15.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that Defendants, and each

of them, including those defendants named as DOES 1-20, acted in concert with one another to commit

the wrongful acts alleged herein, and aided, abetted, incited, compelled and/or coerced one another in the

wrongful acts alleged herein, and/or attempted to do so, including pursuant to Government Code

§12940(i). Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and based thereupon alleges, that Defendants, and

each of them, including those defendants named as DOES 1-20, and each of them, formed and executed

a conspiracy or common plan pursuant to which they would commit the unlawful acts alleged herein,

with all such acts alleged herein done as part of and pursuant to said conspiracy, intended to cause and

actually causing Plaintiff harm.

-4COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 5 16.

Whenever and wherever reference is made in this complaint to any act or failure to act by

a Defendant or co-Defendant, such allegations and references shall also be deemed to mean the acts

and/or failures to act by each Defendant acting individually, jointly and severally.
17.

Plaintiff has filed complaints of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, failure to prevent

discrimination, retaliation or harassment, and wrongful termination under Government Code §§12940, et

seq., the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) with the California Civil Rights

Department and has satisfied Plaintiff’s administrative prerequisites with respect to these and all related

filings.
ALTER EGO, AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AND JOINT EMPLOYER

18.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that there exists such a unity

of interest and ownership between Employers and DOES 1-20 that the individuality and separateness of

defendants have ceased to exist.

19.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that despite the formation of

purported corporate existence, Employers and DOES 1-20 are, in reality, one and the same, including,

but not limited to because:

a.
Employers are completely dominated and controlled by one another and DOES 1-

20, who personally committed the frauds and violated the laws as set forth in this complaint, and who

have hidden and currently hide behind Defendants to perpetrate frauds, circumvent statutes, or

accomplish some other wrongful or inequitable purpose.

b.
Employers and DOES 1-20 derive actual and significant monetary benefits by and

through one another’s unlawful conduct, and by using one another as the funding source for their own

personal expenditures.

c.
Employers and DOES 1-20, while really one and the same, were segregated to

appear as though separate and distinct for purposes of perpetrating a fraud, circumventing a statute, or

accomplishing some other wrongful or inequitable purpose.

d.
Employers do not comply with all requisite corporate formalities to maintain a
legal and separate corporate existence.
-5COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 6 e.

The business affairs of Employers and DOES 1-20 are, and at all times relevant

were, so mixed and intermingled that the same cannot reasonably be segregated, and the same are in

inextricable confusion. Employers are, and at all times relevant hereto were, used by one another and

DOES 1-20 as a mere shell and conduit for the conduct of certain of Defendants’ affairs, and are, and

were, the alter ego of one another and DOES 1-20. The recognition of the separate existence of

Defendants would not promote justice, in that it would permit Defendants to insulate themselves from

liability to Plaintiff for violations of the Government Code and other statutory violations. The corporate

existence of Employers and DOES 1-20 should be disregarded in equity and for the ends of justice

because such disregard is necessary to avoid fraud and injustice to Plaintiff herein.

20.
Accordingly, Employers constitute the alter ego of one another and DOES 1-20, and the
fiction of their separate corporate existence must be disregarded.
21.
As a result of the aforementioned facts, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based

thereon alleges that Employers and DOES 1-20 are Plaintiff’s joint employers by virtue of a joint

enterprise, and that Plaintiff was an employee of Employers and DOES 1-20. Plaintiff performed services

for each and every one of Defendants, and to the mutual benefit of all Defendants, and all Defendants

shared control of Plaintiff as an employee, either directly or indirectly, and the manner in which

Defendants’ business was and is conducted.

22.
Alternatively, Plaintiff is informed and believes and, based thereupon alleges, that as and

between DOES 1-20, Employer, or any of them, (1) there is an express or implied agreement of

assumption pursuant to which Employers and/or DOES 1-20 agreed to be liable for the debts of the other

Defendants, (2) the transaction between Employers and/or DOES 1-20 and the other Defendants amounts

to a consolidation or merger of the two corporations, (3) Employers and/or DOES 1-20 are a mere

continuation of the other Defendants, or (4) the transfer of assets to Employers and/or DOES 1-20 is for

the fraudulent purpose of escaping liability for Defendants’ debts. Accordingly, Employers and/or DOES

1-20 are the successors of one or more of the other Defendants and are liable on that basis.

-6COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 7
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
23.

On or about January 25, 2021, Employers hired Plaintiff to work as an assembly worker.

Plaintiff was a full-time, non-exempt employee, and performed all of Plaintiff’s job duties satisfactorily

before Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated on or about June 30, 2021.
24.

Between January 25, 2021 and June 30, 2021, Plaintiff’s hourly wage rate was $23.10.

During this time, Plaintiff’s schedule was approximately 5 days per week, for approximately 12 hours

per day.
25.

Throughout Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff was not permitted to, and not advised of

Plaintiff’s right to take statutory 10-minute rest breaks for every four hours worked or substantial portion

thereof. One or more of Plaintiff’s 10-minute rest breaks were not provided approximately 5 days per

week.

26.
Throughout Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff was harassed by Andrew Doe, Pedro Doe,
Kai Doe and Mona Doe.
27.
During Plaintiff’s employment, Pedro Doe asked Plaintiff if Plaintiff would have sex with

a man who looked like a woman, if Plaintiff would have sex with another employee, about Plaintiff’s

sexual orientation, if Plaintiff would have sex with a guy for money, how much money would it take for

Plaintiff to have sex with a guy, if Plaintiff ever had a boyfriend, how girls have sex with each other, if

Plaintiff would have sex with Pedro Doe or Pedro Doe’s wife. Pedro Doe also told Plaintiff that if Plaintiff

wanted to get ahead at Employer, Plaintiff would have to suck a penis and for Plaintiff to get the knee

pads out. Pedro Doe also cornered Plaintiff, blocked Plaintiff, and pressed his body against Plaintiff’s

body. Plaintiff immediately resisted by yelling at Pedro Doe to move away. Plaintiff always declined

Pedro Doe’s advances.

28.
Plaintiff reported Pedro Doe’s actions to Plaintiff’s supervisor, to a lead at Employer, and

to Employers’ Human Resources (“HR”) Department. Plaintiff’s supervisor told Plaintiff that he would

look into the matter and take care of it, however, nothing happened. Employers’ HR Department only

offered Plaintiff to be moved away to a new area of work but did not investigate or take any action

regarding the incidences that Plaintiff reported.

-7COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 8
29.
During Plaintiff’s employment, Andrew Doe groped Plaintiff’s breasts, squeezed

Plaintiff’s buttocks and put his hand over Plaintiff’s vagina. Plaintiff immediately resisted by backing

away. At all relevant times, Plaintiff declined Andrew Doe’s advances. Plaintiff reported Andrew Doe’s

actions to her lead at Employers, and to Employers’ HR Department. However, no action was taken to

aid Plaintiff.

30.
Throughout Plaintiff’s employment, Kai Doe sexually harassed Plaintiff by following

Plaintiff around and waiting for Plaintiff outside the women’s bathroom. At all relevant times, Plaintiff

declined Kai Doe’s advances. Plaintiff reported Kai Doe’s actions to the Employers’ HR department.

Then, Kai Doe obtained Plaintiff’s cellphone number from another employee and started sending Plaintiff

text messages, which terrified Plaintiff.

department. When Plaintiff would decline Kai Doe’s advances, Kai Doe threatened Plaintiff by opening

his bag and showing Plaintiff his gun and told Plaintiff that he carried the gun every day to work. During

Plaintiff’s employment, Kai Doe hugged Plaintiff from behind, kissed her on the cheek, attempted to hold

Plaintiff’s hand, and tried to kiss Plaintiff on the lips but Plaintiff immediately resisted by turning away

and stopped him from continuing his sexual advances.

31.
Plaintiff again reported Kai Doe to the Employers’ HR
During Plaintiff’s employment, on two occasions, Mona Doe choked Plaintiff, picked

Plaintiff up by her neck and held Plaintiff off the ground. Mona Doe choked Plaintiff in front of Plaintiff’s

supervisor and another employees but no one helped Plaintiff. Plaintiff immediately resisted by yelling

at Mona Doe to stop touching Plaintiff and confronted Mona Doe.

32.
Shortly thereafter, Employers wrongfully terminated Plaintiff on or about June 30, 2021.

33.
Plaintiff’s termination was substantially motivated by Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual

orientation, and/or engagement in protected activities. Defendants’ discriminatory animus is evidenced

by the previously mentioned facts.

34.
Defendants’ conduct described herein was undertaken, authorized, and/or ratified

Defendants’ officers, directors and/or managing agents, including, but not limited to Jonathan Doe,

Randy Doe, Elle Doe and George Doe, and those identified herein as DOES 1 through 20, who were

authorized and empowered to make decisions that reflect and/or create policy for Defendants. The

aforementioned conduct of said managing agents and individuals was therefore undertaken on behalf of
-8COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 9
Defendants who further had advanced knowledge of the actions and conduct of said individuals whose

actions and conduct were ratified, authorized, and approved by managing agents whose precise identities

are unknown to Plaintiff at this time and are therefore identified and designated herein as DOES 1 through

20, inclusive.
35.

As a result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer general

and special damages, including severe and profound pain and emotional distress, anxiety, depression,

headaches, tension, and other physical ailments, as well as medical expenses, expenses for psychological

counseling and treatment, and past and future lost wages and benefits.
36.

commissions, benefits and loss or diminution of earning capacity.
37.

As a result of the above, Plaintiff is entitled to past and future lost wages, bonuses,
Plaintiff claims general damages for emotional and mental distress and aggravation in a
sum in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
38.

Because the acts taken toward Plaintiff were carried out by officers, directors and/or

managing agents acting in a deliberate, cold, callous, cruel and intentional manner, in conscious disregard

of Plaintiff’s rights and in order to injure and damage Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests that punitive damages

be levied against Defendants and each of them, in sums in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this

Court.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV’T CODE §§12940 ET SEQ.

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

39.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
40.
At all times hereto, the FEHA was in full force and effect and was binding upon
Defendants and each of them.
41.
As such term is used under FEHA, “on the bases enumerated in this part” means or refers
to discrimination on the bases of one or more of the protected characteristics under FEHA.

-9COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 10
42.
FEHA requires Defendants to refrain from discriminating against an employee on the

basis of gender, sex, sexual orientation, and to prevent discrimination and harassment on the basis of

gender. sex, sexual orientation and engagement in protected activities from occurring.

43.

sexual orientation.

44.

Plaintiff was a member of multiple protected classes as a result of her gender, sex and
At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was performing competently in the position Plaintiff
held with Defendants.
45.
Plaintiff suffered the adverse employment actions of unlawful harassment, discrimination,
failure to investigate, remedy, and/or prevent discrimination, failure to reinstate and/or return to work,
and constructive termination, and was harmed thereby.
46.
Plaintiff is informed and believes that Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual orientation, and/or

some combination of these protected characteristics under Government Code §12926(j) were motivating

reasons and/or factors in the decisions to subject Plaintiff to the aforementioned adverse employment

actions.

47.
Said conduct violates the FEHA, and such violations were a proximate cause in Plaintiff’s
damage as stated below.
48.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
49.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their officers,

directors and/or managing agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was

despicable conduct carried on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of

Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights

such as to constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to

punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

50.
Pursuant to Government Code §12965(b), Plaintiff requests a reasonable award of
attorneys’ fees and costs, including expert fees pursuant to the FEHA.

-10COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 11
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOV’T CODE §§12940 ET SEQ.

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

51.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
52.
At all times hereto, the FEHA was in full force and effect and was binding upon
Defendants and each of them.
53.
As such term is used under FEHA, “on the bases enumerated in this part” means or refers
to harassment on the bases of one or more of the protected characteristics under FEHA.
54.
These laws set forth in the preceding paragraph require Defendants to refrain from

harassing, or creating, or maintaining a hostile work environment against an employee based upon the

employee’s gender, sex, sexual orientation, and engagement in protected activities, as set forth

hereinabove.

55.
Defendants’ harassing conduct was severe or pervasive, was unwelcome by Plaintiff, and

a reasonable person in Plaintiff’s circumstances would have considered the work environment to be

hostile or abusive.

56.
Defendants violated the FEHA and the public policy of the State of California which is

embodied in the FEHA by creating a hostile work environment and harassing Plaintiff because of

Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual orientation, engagement in protected activities, and/or some combination

of these protected characteristics, as set forth hereinabove.

57.
The above said acts were perpetrated upon Plaintiff by a supervisor, and/or Defendants
knew or should have known of the conduct but failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.
58.
The above said acts of Defendants constitute violations of the FEHA and violations of the

public policy of the State of California. Such violations were a proximate cause in Plaintiff’s damage as

stated below.

59.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.

-11COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 12
60.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their officers,

directors and/or managing agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was

despicable conduct carried on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of

Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights

such as to constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to

punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

61.
Pursuant to Government Code §12965(b), Plaintiff requests a reasonable award of
attorneys’ fees and costs, including expert fees pursuant to the FEHA.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV’T CODE §§12940 ET SEQ.

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

62.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
63.
At all times hereto, the FEHA was in full force and effect and was binding upon
Defendants and each of them.
64.
These laws set forth in the preceding paragraph require Defendants to refrain from
retaliating against an employee for engaging in protected activity.
65.
Plaintiff engaged in the protected activities of complaining about and protesting

Defendants’ discriminatory and harassing conduct towards Plaintiff based upon her gender, sex and

sexual orientation.

66.
Plaintiff suffered the adverse employment actions of unlawful harassment, discrimination,

failure to investigate, remedy, and/or prevent discrimination, failure to reinstate and/or return to work,

and constructive termination, and was harmed thereby.

67.
Plaintiff is informed and believes that Plaintiff’s conduct of complaining about and

protesting Defendants’ discriminatory and harassing conduct, and/or some combination of these factors,

were motivating reasons and/or factors in the decisions to subject Plaintiff to the aforementioned adverse

employment actions.
-12COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 13
68.
Defendants violated the FEHA by retaliating against Plaintiff and terminating Plaintiff for
attempting to exercise Plaintiff’s protected rights, as set forth hereinabove.
69.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the above acts of

retaliation committed by Defendants were done with the knowledge, consent, and/or ratification of, or at

the direction of, each other Defendant and the other Managers.

70.
The above said acts of Defendants constitute violations of the FEHA, and were a
proximate cause in Plaintiff’s damage as stated below.
71.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
72.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their officers,

directors and/or managing agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was

despicable conduct carried on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of

Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights

such as to constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to

punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

73.
Pursuant to Government Code §12965(b), Plaintiff requests a reasonable award of
attorneys’ fees and costs, including expert fees pursuant to the FEHA.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT, AND RETALIATION

IN VIOLATION OF GOV’T CODE §12940(k)

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

74.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
75.
At all times hereto, the FEHA, including in particular Government Code §12940(k), was

in full force and effect and was binding upon Defendants. This subsection imposes a duty on Defendants

to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation from

-13COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 14
occurring. As alleged above, Defendants violated this subsection and breached their duty by failing to

take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation from occurring.

76.
The above said acts of Defendants constitute violations of the FEHA, and were a
proximate cause in Plaintiff’s damage as stated below.
77.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
78.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their officers,

directors and/or managing agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was

despicable conduct carried on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of

Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights

such as to constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to

punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

79.
Pursuant to Government Code §12965(b), Plaintiff requests a reasonable award of
attorneys’ fees and costs, including expert fees pursuant to the FEHA.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

80.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
81.
Government Code §12920 sets forth the public policy of the State of California as follows:
It is hereby declared as the public policy of this state that it is necessary to
protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek,
obtain, and hold employment without discrimination or abridgment on
account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical
disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information,
marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, or
sexual orientation.
It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and
discriminating in the terms of employment for these reasons foments
domestic strife and unrest, deprives the state of the fullest utilization of its
capacities for development and advancement, and substantially and
adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in
general.
-14COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 15 Further, the practice of discrimination because of race, color, religion,
sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation,
marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income,
disability, or genetic information in housing accommodations is declared
to be against public policy.

It is the purpose of this part to provide effective remedies that will
eliminate these discriminatory practices.

This part shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state for
the protection of the welfare, health, and peace of the people of this state.

82.

In order to eliminate discrimination, it is necessary to provide effective
remedies that will both prevent and deter unlawful employment practices
and redress the adverse effects of those practices on aggrieved persons.
To that end, this part shall be deemed an exercise of the Legislature's
authority pursuant to Section 1 of Article XIV of the California
Constitution.

83.

Moreover, Government Code §12921, subdivision (a) says in pertinent part:
The opportunity to seek, obtain, and hold employment without
discrimination because of race, religious creed, color, national origin,
ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic
information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender
expression, age, or sexual orientation is hereby recognized as and
declared to be a civil right.

Government Code §12920.5 embodies the intent of the California legislature and states:
84.
An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Plaintiff and Defendants

concerning their respective rights and duties as it is believed that Defendants may allege that they did not

discriminate and retaliate against Plaintiff; that Plaintiff was not terminated as a result of Plaintiff’s

gender, sex, sexual orientation, engagement in protected activities, and/or some combination of these

protected characteristics. Plaintiff contends that Defendants did discriminate and retaliate against

Plaintiff on the basis of Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual orientation, engagement in protected activities,

and/or some combination of these protected characteristics; and that Plaintiff was retaliated against and,

ultimately wrongfully terminated as a result of Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual orientation, engagement in

protected activities, and/or some combination of these protected characteristics. Plaintiff is informed and

believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants shall dispute Plaintiff's contentions.

85.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §1060, Plaintiff desires a judicial determination of
Plaintiff’s rights and duties, and a declaration that Defendants harassed Plaintiff on the basis of Plaintiff’s
-15COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 16
gender, sex, sexual orientation, engagement in protected activities, and/or some combination of these

protected characteristics.

86.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §1060, Plaintiff seeks a judicial determination of

Plaintiff’s rights and duties, and a declaration that Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual orientation, engagement

in protected activities, and/or some combination of these protected characteristics was a substantial

motivating factor in the decision to subject Plaintiff to the aforementioned adverse employment actions.

87.
A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time under the circumstances in

order that Plaintiff, for Plaintiff and on behalf of employees in the State of California and in conformity

with the public policy of the State, obtain a judicial declaration of the wrongdoing of Defendants and to

condemn such discriminatory employment policies or practices prospectively. Harris v. City of Santa

Monica (2013) 56 Cal.4th 203.

88.
A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time such that Defendants may

also be aware of their obligations under the law to not engage in discriminatory practices and to not

violate the law in the future.

89.
Government Code §12965(b) provides that an aggrieved party, such as the Plaintiff herein,

may be awarded reasonable attorney's fees and costs: "In civil actions brought under this section, the

court, in its discretion, may award to the prevailing party, including the department, reasonable attorney's

fees and costs, including expert witness fees." Such fees and costs expended by an aggrieved party may

be awarded for the purpose of redressing, preventing, or deterring discrimination and harassment.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR COMMON LAW BATTERY

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

90.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
91.
A person is liable for battery if the person intentionally caused a harmful or offensive
touching of another person.

-16COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 17
92.
As alleged herein, Individual Defendants acted with intent to cause a harmful or offensive
touching of Plaintiff, and a harmful and offensive touching of Plaintiff resulted.
93.
As alleged herein, Individual Defendants repeatedly solicited, encouraged, enabled, and

conspired with DOES 1-20 to act with intent to cause a harmful or offensive touching of Plaintiff, and a

harmful and offensive touching of Plaintiff repeatedly resulted.

94.
At all times when committing the aforementioned batteries, Individual Defendants acting,
at least in part, in the course and scope of their employment with Employers.
95.
The above said acts of Individual Defendants were a proximate cause in Plaintiff’s
damages as stated below.
96.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
97.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their managing

agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiffs or was despicable conduct carried

on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs or subjected

Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights such as to constitute

malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiffs to punitive damages in

an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR COMMON LAW ASSAULT

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

98.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
99.
A person is liable for assault if the person intentionally threatened another person causing
a reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive bodily contact.
100.
As alleged herein, Individual Defendants acted with intent to threaten Plaintiff with an

imminent harmful or offensive bodily contact and caused Plaintiff a reasonable apprehension of such

contact.
-17COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 18 101.

As alleged herein, Individual Defendants repeatedly solicited, encouraged, enabled, and

conspired with DOES 1-20 to act with intent to threaten Plaintiffs with an imminent harmful or offensive

bodily contact and repeatedly caused Plaintiff a reasonable apprehension of such contact.
102.

acting, at least in part, in the course and scope of their employment with Employers.

At all times when committing the aforementioned batteries, Individual Defendants was
103.
The above said acts of Defendants were a proximate cause in Plaintiff’s damages as stated
104.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
below.
by reference.
105.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their managing

agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiffs or was despicable conduct carried

on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs or subjected

Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights such as to constitute

malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiffs to punitive damages in

an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR SEXUAL BATTERY IN VIOLATION OF CIVIL CODE §1708.5 ET SEQ.

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

106.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
107.
At all times hereto, Civil Code §1708.5 was in full force and effect and was binding upon

Defendants and each of them. Under Civil Code §1708.5, a person is civilly liable for sexual battery if

the person acted with the intent to cause harmful or offensive contact with an intimate part of another,

and a sexually offensive contact results.

108.
As alleged herein, Andrew Doe, Pedro Doe and Kai Doe repeatedly acted with intent to

cause harmful or offensive contact with an intimate part of Plaintiff, and a sexually offensive and harmful

contact resulted. At the time of their sexual batteries upon Plaintiff, Andrew Doe, Pedro Doe and Kai
-18COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 19
Doe were acting at least in part in the course and scope of their employment with Employers, and

Employers and DOES 1-20, repeatedly ratified Andrew Doe’s, Pedro Doe’s and Kai Doe’s sexual

batteries upon Plaintiff.

109.
The above said acts of Defendants constitute violations of Civil Code §1708.5, and were
a proximate cause in Plaintiffs’ damages as stated below.
110.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
111.
Pursuant to Civil Code §1708.5(c), Plaintiff request an award of punitive damages, in
addition to general and special damages.
112.
Pursuant to Civil Code §1708.5(c) and this court’s statutory authority to award any other

relief the court deems proper, Plaintiff requests a reasonable award of attorneys’ fees and costs, including

expert fees, and any other relief the court deems proper.

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR GENDER VIOLENCE

CIVIL CODE §52.
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

113.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
114.
At all relevant times mentioned in this complaint, Civil Code §52.4 was in full force and
effect and was binding on Defendants.
115.
Civil Code §52.4 declares, in pertinent part, that any person subjected to gender violence

may bring a civil action for damages against any responsible party, and may seek actual, compensatory,

and punitive damages thereof, or any other appropriate relief.

116.
For purposes of Civil Code §52.4, gender violence is a form of sex discrimination and
means any of the following:
a.
An act that would constitute a criminal offense under state law that has as an
element the use, attempted use or threatened use of physical force against the person of another,
-19COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 20
committed at least in part based on the gender of the victim, whether or not the act has resulted in a

criminal complaint, charge, prosecution, or conviction.
b.

A physical intrusion or physical invasion of a sexual nature under coercive
conditions, whether or not the act has resulted in a criminal complaint, charge, prosecution, or conviction.
117.

As alleged above, Individual Defendants assaulted, battered, sexually assaulted, and

sexually battered Plaintiff thereby subjecting her to gender violence within the meaning of Civil Code

§52.4.
118.

As alleged above, Individual Defendants engaged in the foregoing conduct at least in part
based on Plaintiff’s gender, thereby subjecting her to gender violence within the meaning of Civil Code
§52.4.
119.
As alleged above, Individual Defendants grabbed and touched Plaintiff’s body while

Plaintiff was working, and thereby assaulted and battered Plaintiff, thereby subjecting Plaintiff to gender

violence within the meaning of Civil Code §52.4.

120.
As alleged above, Individual Defendants engaged in the foregoing conduct at least in part

based on Plaintiff’s gender, thereby subjecting Plaintiff to gender violence within the meaning of Civil

Code §52.4.

121.
At the time of the gender violence, Individual Defendants were acting at least in part, in

the course and scope of their employment with Employers, as employees and agents, and Employers

enabled the Individual Defendants’ gender violence committed against Plaintiff.

122.
In so doing, Individual Defendants, and Employers committed gender violence against
Plaintiff in violation of Civil Code §52.4.
123.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
124.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their managing

agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was despicable conduct carried

on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff

to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s right to be free from gender violence,

-20COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 21
such as to constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §52.4(a), thereby entitling Plaintiff to

punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

125.
Pursuant to Civil Code §52.4(a), Plaintiff requests an award of attorneys’ fees in
prosecuting this action.

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR VIOLATION OF THE RALPH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT

CIVIL CODE §51.
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

126.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
127.
At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff had the right to be from any violence, or
intimidation by threat of violence, committed against her person on account of her sex and/or gender.
128.
As alleged above, Defendants subjected Plaintiff to violence, and/or intimidation by
threats of violence against their person on account of their sex and/or gender.
129.
In so doing, Defendants violated the civil rights of Plaintiff, as set forth in the Ralph Civil
Rights Act, which is codified in Civil Code §51.7.
130.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
131.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their managing

agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was despicable conduct carried

on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff

to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s right to be free from violence, or

intimidation by threat of violence, committed against her person on account of her sex and/or gender,

such as to constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to

punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

-21COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 22
132.
In addition to and/or in lieu of Plaintiff’s election, Plaintiff is entitled to receive and hereby

seek statutory damages pursuant to Civil Code §52(b), including actual and exemplary damages, as well

as a civil penalty pursuant to Civil Code §52(b)(2) of $25,000.

133.
Pursuant to Civil Code §52(b)(3), Plaintiff request an award of attorneys’ fees in
prosecuting this action.

ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR VIOLATION OF THE TOM BANE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT

CIVIL CODE §52.
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

134.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
135.
At all relevant times mentioned in this complaint, the FEHA was in full force and effect

and was binding on Defendants, and each of them. This law requires Defendants to refrain, among other

things, from discriminating against any employee on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex and

gender, and from retaliating against any employee who engages in protected activity. At all times

mentioned in this complaint, Article I, Section 8 of the California Constitution was in full force and effect

and binding on Defendants. This law requires Defendants to refrain from disqualifying a person from

pursuing employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex.

136.
Pursuant to the foregoing laws, Plaintiff had the right to lawful employment free from

violence, threats of violence and intimidation, as well as the right to report to their employer and/or protest

discriminatory and harassing conduct of Plaintiff based upon her sex and/or gender, and in the peaceable

exercise or enjoyment thereof to be free from interference by threats, intimidation, or coercion, or

attempts to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion.

137.
As alleged above, Defendants repeatedly interfered with, or attempted to interfere with
Plaintiff’s peaceable exercise and enjoyment of said rights by threats, intimidation, or coercion.
138.
In so doing, Defendants violated the civil rights of Plaintiff, as set forth in the Tom Bane
Civil Rights Act, which is codified in Civil Code §52.1.
-22COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 23
139.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
140.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their managing

agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was despicable conduct carried

on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiff or subjected Plaintiff

to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s right to be free from interference by

threats, intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion, such as to

constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to punitive

damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

141.
In addition to and/or in lieu of Plaintiffs’ election, Plaintiff are entitled to receive and
hereby seeks statutory damages pursuant to Civil Code §52(b), including actual and exemplary damages.
142.
Pursuant to Civil Code §52.1(h), Plaintiff requests an award of attorneys’ fees in
prosecuting this action.

TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR COMMON LAW NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND RETENTION

AGAINST EMPLOYERS AND DOES 1-20, INCLUSIVE

143.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
144.
An employer is liable for negligent supervision or retention of an employee if the employer

knew or should have known that the employee created a particular risk to others; that the employee

harmed the plaintiffs, and that the employer’s negligence in supervising or retaining the employee was a

substantial factor in causing the plaintiffs’ harm.

145.
Employers owed Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to supervise their employees and to
take reasonable steps to prevent them from threatening or injuring Plaintiff.
146.
Employers further owed Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to discharge from employment

employees who had threatened or injured or were reasonably likely to threaten or injure others with whom

they came into contact at work, including Plaintiff.
-23COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 24
147.
Employers had reason to know that Individual Defendants created a risk or threat of injury

to Plaintiff, as alleged herein, due to, but not limited to, Individual Defendants’ sexual harassment of

Plaintiff, and his solicitation and ratification by Employers.

148.
Employers breached their duties by failing to properly supervise or control Individual

Defendants; and by failing to terminate the employment of Individual Defendants so that Plaintiff could

work in a reasonably safe environment.

149.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.
150.
The foregoing conduct of Defendants, by and through its officers, directors and/or

managing agents, was intended by Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was despicable conduct

carried on by Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiff or subjected

Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights such as to constitute

malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to punitive damages in

an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR WRONGFUL TERMINATION

IN VIOLATION THE PUBLIC POLICY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

151.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
152.
At all relevant times mentioned in this complaint, the FEHA was in full force and effect

and was binding on Defendants. This law requires Defendants to refrain, among other things, from

discriminating against any employee on the basis of gender, sex, and sexual orientation, and from

retaliating against any employee who engages in protected activity.

153.
At all times mentioned in this complaint, it was a fundamental policy of the State of

California that Defendants cannot discriminate and/or retaliate against any employee on the basis of

gender, sex, sexual orientation, and/or engagement in protected activity.

-24COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 25
154.
Plaintiff believes and thereon alleges that Plaintiff’s gender, sex, sexual orientation and/or,

engagement in protected activity with respect to these protected classes, and/or some combination

thereof, were factors in Defendants’ conduct as alleged hereinabove.

155.
Such discrimination and retaliation, resulting in the wrongful termination of Plaintiff’s

employment on the basis of gender, sex, and sexual orientation, Plaintiff’s complaining of harassment

and discrimination due to these protected classes, Plaintiff’s engagement in protected activity, and/or

some combination of these factors, were a proximate cause in Plaintiff’s damages as stated below.

156.
The above said acts of Defendants constitute violations of the Government Code and the

public policy of the State of California embodied therein as set forth above. Defendants violated these

laws by discriminating and retaliating against Plaintiff and terminating Plaintiff’s employment in

retaliation for exercise of protected rights.

157.
The damage allegations of Paragraphs 35 through 38, inclusive, are herein incorporated
by reference.

The foregoing conduct of Defendants individually, or by and through their officers, directors

and/or managing agents, was intended by the Defendants to cause injury to the Plaintiff or was despicable

conduct carried on by the Defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiff or

subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights such as to

constitute malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294, thereby entitling Plaintiff to punitive

damages in an amount appropriate to punish or make an example of Defendants.

FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR FAILURE TO PAY WAGES DUE

LABOR CODE §§201, 1182.12, 1194, 1194.
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

158.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
159.
At all relevant times, Defendants failed and refused to pay Plaintiff wages earned and

required by 8 Code of Regulations §11010, as set forth hereinabove. As alleged herein, Defendants

routinely failed to pay Plaintiff for missed rest breaks.
-25COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 26
160.
As alleged herein, Plaintiff was not exempt from the requirements of Labor Code §510,
Code of Regulations §11010, and Industrial Welfare Commission Order No. 1-2001.
161.
Plaintiff has been deprived of Plaintiff’s rightfully earned compensation as a direct and

proximate result of Defendants’ failure and refusal to pay said compensation. Plaintiff is entitled to

recover such amounts, plus interest thereon, attorneys’ fees and costs.

FIFTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE REST PERIODS

CAL. LABOR CODE §§226.
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

162.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
163.
Labor Code §226.7 requires an employer to provide every employee with an uninterrupted

rest period of not less than 10 minutes, for every period worked of four hours, or substantial portion

thereof.

164.
In the four years last past, Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of twelve hours per day,
and was thereby entitled to take uninterrupted three 10-minute rest periods on each day of work.
165.
Defendants failed and refused to provide Plaintiff with rest periods, and failed to

compensate Plaintiff for missed rest periods, as required by Labor Code §§226.7 and the applicable

sections of 8 Code of Regulations §11010 and Industrial Welfare Commission Order No. 1-2001, as

follows:
c.

From approximately January 25, 2021 to approximately June 30, 2021, Plaintiff

was deprived of one or more of Plaintiff’s statutory 10-minute rest periods on approximately five (5) days

per week for approximately 22 weeks, or on approximately 110 days.

166.
As alleged herein, Plaintiff is not exempt from the rest break requirements of 8 Code of

Regulations §11010 and Industrial Welfare Commission Order No. 1-2001. Consequently, Plaintiff is

owed one hour of pay at Plaintiff’s regular hourly rate, or the requisite minimum wage, whichever is

greater, for each day that Plaintiff was denied such rest periods, calculated as follows:

-26COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 27 d.

From approximately January 25, 2021 to June 30, 2021, Defendants failed to

provide Plaintiff with the statutory rest period on approximately 110 separate days. Consequently,

Plaintiff is owed one hour of pay at $23.10 for each day, or approximately $2,541.00, plus interest

thereon, for unpaid rest periods.
167.

approximately $2,541.00.
168.

Thus, the total missed rest period compensation owing Plaintiff for this time period is
Plaintiff has been deprived of Plaintiff’s rightfully earned compensation for rest breaks as
a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ failure and refusal to pay said compensation.
169.

Thus, for the entirety of the time periods set forth above, Plaintiff is entitled to recover

such amounts in the combined amount of $2,541.00, pursuant to Labor Code §226.7(b), plus interest

thereon and costs of suit.

SIXTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE ITEMIZED WAGE AND HOUR STATEMENTS

LABOR CODE §§226, ET SEQ.

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
170.

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
171.

Pursuant to Labor Code §§226 and 1174, employers have a duty to provide their non-

exempt employees with itemized statements showing total hours worked, hourly wages, gross wages,

total deductions and net wages earned. An employer who violates these code sections is liable to its

employees for the greater of actual damages suffered by the employee, or, $50.00 in civil penalties for

the initial pay period in which a violation occurred, and $100.00 per employee for each subsequent pay

period, up to a statutory maximum of $4,000.00. Pursuant to Labor Code §226(e)(2), an employee is

deemed to suffer injury for purposes of this subdivision if the employer fails to provide a wage statement

at all.

172.
At all relevant times, Defendants failed to provide the Plaintiff with timely and accurate

wage and hour statements showing gross wages earned, total hours worked, all deductions made, net

wages earned, the name and address of the legal entity employing Plaintiff, and all applicable hours and
-27COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 28
rates in effect during each pay period and the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate

by Plaintiff. Not one of the paystubs that Plaintiff received complied with Labor Code §226.

173.
As alleged herein, Plaintiff is not exempt from the requirements of Labor Code §226.

174.
This failure has injured Plaintiff, by misrepresenting and depriving Plaintiff of hour, wage,

and earnings information to which Plaintiff is entitled, causing Plaintiff difficulty and expense in

attempting to reconstruct time and pay records, causing Plaintiff not to be paid wages Plaintiff is entitled

to, causing Plaintiff to be unable to rely on earnings statements in dealings with third parties, eviscerating

Plaintiff’s right under Labor Code §226(b) to review itemized wage statement information by inspecting

the employer’s underlying records, and deceiving Plaintiff regarding Plaintiff’s entitlement to rest period

compensation and/or wages.
175.

Plaintiff was paid on a bi-weekly basis, and therefore Defendants violated Labor Code

§226 approximately 55 times during the Plaintiff’s employment. Consequently, Defendants are liable to

Plaintiff for Plaintiff’s actual damages, or penalties up to the statutory maximum amount of $4,000.00,

whichever is greater.

176.
Based on Defendants’ conduct as alleged herein, Defendants are liable for damages and

statutory penalties pursuant to Labor Code §226, and other applicable provisions, as well as attorneys’

fees and costs.

SEVENTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTIONFOR WAITING TIME PENALTIES

LABOR CODE §§201-
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
177.

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
178.

At all relevant times, Defendants failed to pay all of the Plaintiff’s accrued wages and

other compensation due immediately upon termination or within 72 hours of resignation, as required.

These wages refer to, at a minimum, unpaid minimum wages, overtime compensation, and meal and rest

period compensation that Defendants should have paid, but did not pay to Plaintiff during the term of

Plaintiff’s employment and which were, at the latest, due within the time restraints of Labor Code §§201-

203.
-28COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 29
179.
As alleged herein, Plaintiff is not exempt from the requirements of Labor Code §§201-
180.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful failure to pay these wages, Plaintiff
203.

is entitled to payment of Plaintiff’s rest periods as previously pleaded herein, and more than $9,702.00 in

wait time penalties, calculated based on 30 days of Plaintiff’s daily wage rate of approximately $323.40,

inclusive of overtime.

181.
Based on Defendants’ conduct as alleged herein, Defendants are liable for $9,702.00 in

statutory penalties pursuant to Labor Code §203 and other applicable provisions, as well as attorneys’

fees and costs.

EIGHTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

UNFAIR COMPETITION

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §§17200, ET SEQ.

AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

182.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs as
though set forth in full herein.
183.
Defendants’ violations of 8 Code of Regulations §11010, Industrial Welfare Commission

Order No. 1-2001, Labor Code §§201-203, 226, 226.7, 1182.12, 1194, 1194.2, and other applicable

provisions, as alleged herein, including Defendants’ failure to pay wages due, Defendants’ failure to

provide rest breaks, Defendants’ failure to provide timely and accurate wage and hour statements,

Defendants’ failure to pay compensation due in a timely manner upon termination or resignation, and

Defendants’ failure to maintain complete and accurate payroll records for the Plaintiff, constitute unfair

business practices in violation of Business & Professions Code §§17200, et seq.

184.
As a result of Defendants’ unfair business practices, Defendants have reaped unfair

benefits and illegal profits at the expense of Plaintiff and members of the public. Defendants should be

made to disgorge their ill-gotten gains and restore such monies to Plaintiff.

185.
Defendants’ unfair business practices entitle Plaintiff to seek preliminary and permanent
injunctive relief, including but not limited to orders that the Defendants account for, disgorge, and restore

-29COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 30
to the Plaintiff the overtime compensation and other monies and benefits unlawfully withheld from

Plaintiff.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks judgment against Defendants and each of them, in an amount
according to proof as follows:
1.
For a money judgment representing compensatory damages including lost wages,

earnings, commissions, retirement benefits, and other employee benefits, and all other sums of money,

together with interest on these amounts; for other special damages; and for general damages for mental

pain and anguish and emotional distress and loss of earning capacity;
2.
For payment of rest period compensation pursuant to Labor Code §226.7, in the amount
of no less than $2,541.00;

3.
For damages pursuant to Labor Code §226 in the amount of no less than $4,000.00;

4.
For waiting time penalties pursuant to Labor Code §§201-203 in the amount of no less

than $9,702.00;

5.

For prejudgment interest on each of the foregoing at the legal rate from the date the
obligation became due through the date of judgment in this matter.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff further seeks judgment against Defendants, and each of them, in an
amount according to proof, as follows:
6.
For a declaratory judgment reaffirming Plaintiff’s equal standing under the law and
condemning Defendants’ discriminatory practices;
7.
For injunctive relief barring Defendants’ discriminatory employment policies and
practices in the future, and restoring Plaintiff to Plaintiff’s former position with Defendants;
8.
For punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §§3294 in amounts sufficient to punish
Defendants for the wrongful conduct alleged herein and to deter such conduct in the future;
9.
For costs of suit, attorneys’ fees, and expert witness fees pursuant to the FEHA and/or any
other basis;

-30COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Page 31
10.
For injunctive relief compelling Defendants to report to federal and state authorities wages

earned by Plaintiff, and other employees, and pay all state and federal taxes owing, employer matching

funds, unemployment premiums, social security, Medicare, and workers' compensation premiums, all

this in an amount according to the proof;

11.
For restitutionary disgorgement of profits garnered as a result of Defendants’ unlawful
conduct , and failure to pay wages and other compensation in accordance with the law;

12.
For post-judgment interest; and

13.
For any other relief that is just and proper.

DATED: June 30,
LAW OFFICES OF RAMIPHCTDUNESSI
A PROFESSIONAL LA\V CORPORATION

By: /
/
Ramin R. Younessi, Esff.
Attorney for Plaintiff [
MARGARITA VARGAS

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED


Plaintiff demands trial of all issues by jury.
DATED: June 30,
LAW OFFICES OF RAtfllN R. YOUNESSI
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

By:
/
_

Ramin R. Younessi, Esq .
Attorney for Plaintiff
MARGARITA VARGAS


-31COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Space
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
 
PlainSite
Sign Up
Need Password Help?