1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 ALAMEDA COUNTY 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

CHARLIE PLAINTIFF, Individually,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) OUR CLIENT, INC., (d/b/a “OCI”) a foreign ) corporation, BERT CO-WORKER, an ) individual, ERNIE SUPERVISOR, an individual,) and GEORGE OFFICER, an individual, ) ) Defendants. ) )

20

Plaintiff, by and through his attorneys of record in the above-entitled matter to allege and complain as follows:

21 22

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

COMPLAINT

18 19

No.

INTRODUCTION 1.

This lawsuit is for damages against Defendants, jointly and severally, and is

23

brought exclusively under state laws (the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal.

24

Gov’t Code § 12945 et seq.) (“FEHA”). Defendants engaged in and failed to correct

25

discriminatory treatment, severe and pervasive harassment, and unlawful retaliation against

26

Plaintiff, all based on and because of his religion, his sex, and/or his sexual orientation.

27 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 1 DWT 25902182v1 0085000-002435

1

JURISDICTION & VENUE

2

2.

This Court has original jurisdiction because all the alleged torts occurred in

3

Alameda County.

4

3.

Defendants conduct business and are located in Alameda County.

5

4.

All events and facts pled herein and giving rise to this lawsuit occurred in

6

Alameda County.

7

5.

Venue is proper in Alameda County.

8

PARTIES

9

6.

Plaintiff is a male citizen of California and a former employee of OCI.

10

7.

Defendant OCI owns and/or operates a manufacturing facility in Oakland,

11 12

Alameda County, California, and employed the remaining defendants. 8.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Defendant George Officer was the Vice

13

President for Manufacturing of OCI, who had the authority to hire and fire subordinate

14

employees at OCI, including Plaintiff. Defendant Officer was ultimately responsible for

15

Plaintiff’s discriminatory and wrongful termination. Defendant Officer may have acted at

16

times solely in his personal capacity, at times solely within his capacity as Manager within the

17

scope of his employment, and/or at times inconsistent with his duties and responsibilities and in

18

direct contravention of the interests of OCI.

19

9.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Defendant Ernie Supervisor was Plaintiff’s

20

immediate supervisor, who had the authority to evaluate, discipline, schedule, and/or affect the

21

hours, breaks and leave time off of subordinate employees at OCI, including Plaintiff.

22

Defendant Supervisor knew or should have known, and/or was aware or should have been

23

aware of the unlawful harassment and retaliation to which Plaintiff was subjected. Plaintiff is

24

informed and believes that Defendant Supervisor was undergoing marital problems and

25

suffering mental stress that may have affected his ability to act appropriately as a supervisor.

26

Defendant Supervisor may have acted at times solely in his personal capacity, at times within

27 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 2 DWT 25902182v1 0085000-002435

1

his capacity as supervisor within the scope of his employment, and/or at times inconsistent with

2

his duties and responsibilities and in direct contravention of the interests of OCI.

3

10.

At all times relevant to this law suit, Defendant Bert Co-Worker was Plaintiff’s

4

co-worker, who harassed and taunted Plaintiff because of his religion, sex, and/or sexual

5

orientation.

6

FACTS

7

11.

Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

8

12.

This claim arises as a result of the Defendants’ unlawful, intentional, and

9 10

tortious discriminatory and retaliatory practices against Plaintiff. 13.

Defendants intentionally created and/or tolerated/condoned the continuance of a

11

hostile work environment to which Plaintiff was subjected on a daily basis because of his

12

religion, sex, and/or sexual orientation

13 14 15 16 17

14.

Plaintiff was regularly harassed, belittled, and treated less favorably than co-

workers not in his protected class. 15.

Plaintiff complained about the discriminatory and abusive treatment to

management, but was ignored, persecuted, and eventually his employment was terminated. 16.

Defendants did nothing to correct or prevent the discrimination and harassment

18

complained about. Instead, Defendants condoned the harassment and retaliated against

19

Plaintiff for asserting his statutory civil rights and seeking assistance by terminating his

20

employment.

21

CAUSES OF ACTION

22

HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

23

(Violation of FEHA—Against All Defendants)

24 25

17.

Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein as

a proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries.

26 27 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 3 DWT 25902182v1 0085000-002435

1

18.

Defendants engaged in and/or failed to promptly correct a hostile work

2

environment where Plaintiff was subjected to severe and pervasive unwelcome conduct

3

because of his sex, sexual orientation and/or religion.

4

19.

Defendants’ conduct constituted hostile environment harassment and

5

discrimination in violation of FEHA that directly and proximately caused Plaintiff emotional

6

distress and mental anguish, embarrassment, humiliation, lost wages and benefits, lost future

7

wages and benefits, reduced retirement benefits.

8

DISPARATE TREATMENT DISCRIMINATION

9

(Violation of FEHA—Against Defendant OCI)

10 11 12

20.

Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein as

a proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries 21.

Defendants engaged in disparate treatment discrimination where Defendants

13

accorded similarly situated workers more favorable treatment, based on their religion and/or

14

sexual orientation.

15

22.

Defendants’ conduct constituted disparate treatment discrimination in violation

16

of the FEHA that directly and proximately caused Plaintiff emotional distress and mental

17

anguish, embarrassment, humiliation, lost wages and benefits, lost future wages and benefits,

18

and reduced retirement benefits.

19

UNLAWFUL RETALIATION

20

(Violation of FEHA—Against All Defendants)

21 22 23

23.

Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein as

a direct and/or proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. 24.

Defendants unlawfully retaliated against Plaintiff because he sought to assert his

24

rights to be free from religious, sexual orientation and sex discrimination and asserted other

25

rights under the FEHA.

26 27 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 4 DWT 25902182v1 0085000-002435

1

25.

Defendants’ conduct constituted unlawful retaliation in violation of the FEHA

2

that directly and proximately caused Plaintiff emotional distress and mental anguish,

3

embarrassment, humiliation, lost wages and benefits, lost future wages and benefits, reduced

4

retirement benefits and special emotional distress damages. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as follows: (1)

For such economic and noneconomic general damages as shall be established at

time of trial; (2)

For such reasonable attorneys’ fees, interest, costs, and such other and further

relief as shall be allowed by law or deemed just and equitable.

12

(3)

For punitive damages.

13

DATED this ____ day of January, 2015.

14

Attorneys for Plaintiff

15 16

By

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 5 DWT 25902182v1 0085000-002435