Preview
e OR@INAL
MATERN LAW GROUP, PC
MATTHEW J. MATERN (SBN 159798)
mmatern@maternlawgroup.com
DALIA KHALILI (SBN 253840) FI
dkhalili@maternlawgroup.com Superior Court of California
SHAYNA E. DICKSTEIN (SBN 290844) County of Los Angeles
sdickstein@maternlawgroup.com
1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 APR G7 2017
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Sherri R, Carte, ecyitiye Officer/Clerk
Tel: (310) 531-1900
By. , Deputy
Facsimile: (310) 531-1901
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MEDARI RODRIGUEZ,
10
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
i
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
12
MEDARI JAMILETH RODRIGUEZ Case No. BC635730
D SY
13 ~ 3
MARTINEZ, an individual,
Ww
14 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR:
<
15 Plaintiff, Sexual Battery (Civil Code § 1708.5) "Ty
Battery (Civil Code § 52)
16 Violence or Intimidation By Threat of
Vv. Violence (Civil Code § 51.7)
17 Gender Violence (Civil Code § 52.4)
DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
18 California corporation; CAKE SALON BOSCO, Wrongful Constructive Discharge in
INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO Violation of Public Policy
19 BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation;
BRANDON KWAK, an individual; and DOES 1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
20) through 50, inclusive,
21
Defendants.
fe 22
we
2 23
no
@>
re 24
él
25
26
27]
28
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1 This civil rights action is brought to remedy DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a
BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation; CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO
BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation, BRANDON KWAK, an individual;
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive (collectively, “DEFENDANTS”)’ practices of sexual harassment,
sexual battery, violence, related civil rights violations, and tortious acts, PLAINTIFF MEDARI
JAMILETH RODRIGUEZ MARTINEZ (“PLAINTIFF” or “Ms. Rodriguez”) seeks compensatory and
punitive damages, penalties, and attomeys’ fees.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
10 2 The Superior Court of the State of California has personal jurisdiction in this matter
11 because PLAINTIFF is a resident of the State of California, and DEFENDANTS are qualified to do
12 business in California and regularly conduct business in California. Further, no federal question is at issue
13 because the claims are based solely on California law.
14 3 Venue is proper in this judicial district and the County of Los Angeles, California because
15 PLAINTIFF performed work for DEFENDANTS in the County of Los Angeles, DEFENDANTS
16 maintain offices and facilities and transact business in the County of Los Angeles, and DEFENDANTS'
17 unlawful actions and omissions giving rise to this action occurred in the County of Los Angeles.
18 PLAINTIFF
19 4 PLAINTIFF is a female resident of the State of California. At all relevant times herein,
20 PLAINTIFF was employed as a baker in the DEFENDANTS’ bakery and warehouse facility in the
21 County of Los Angeles from on or about October 2014 until on or about December 26, 2014.
2
Be
eo 22 DEFENDANTS
@
he 23 5 Atall relevant times herein, PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that
@oe
nel 24 DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation is, and at all times relevant
25 hereto was, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California.
26 PLAINTIFF is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO
27 BAKERY CAFE is authorized to conduct business in the State of California, and does conduct business in
28 the State of California. Specifically, upon information and belief, DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO
2
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
BAKERY CAFE maintains offices and facilities and conducts business in the County of Los Angeles,
State of California.
6 Atall relevant times herein, PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that
CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California
corporation is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a corporation organized and existing under and by
virtue of the laws of the State of California. PLAINTIFF is further informed and believes, and thereon
alleges, that CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE is
authorized to conduct business in the State of California, and does conduct business in the State of
California. Specifically, upon information and belief, CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO
10 BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE maintains offices and facilities and conducts business in the
11 County of Los Angeles, State of California.
12 7 Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the defendant harasser,
13 BRANDON KWAK (“Mr. KWAK”), is an individual residing in the State of California. At all relevant
14 times herein, Mr. KWAK was employed by the corporate DEFENDANTS and was PLAINTIFF’s direct
15 supervisor and employer. At all relevant times herein, Mr. KWAK was the corporate DEFENDANTS’
16 managing agent, and acted within the course and scope of his employment and/or as an agent of
17 DEFENDANTS during the events described herein, and through his specific actions, caused the violations
18 of law about which PLAINTIFF now complains:
19 8 The true names and capacities of DOES | through 50, inclusive, are unknown to
20 PLAINTIFF at this time, and PLAINTIFF therefore sues such DEFENDANTS under fictitious names.
21 PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each DEFENDANT designated as a DOE
ee
= 22
ee
is highly responsible in some manner for the events and happenings referred to herein, and legally caused
a
nD23
the injuries and damages alleged in this Complaint. PLAINTIFF will seek leave of the court to amend this
24
od Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained.
25 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that a unity of interest and
26 ownership has existed and presently exists between Mr. KWAK and DOES 1 through 50, on the one hand,
27 and DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC.,
28 d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, on the other hand, such that any individuality and
3
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
separateness between them has ceased, and DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY
CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. were and are the alter egos of Mr. KWAK and DOES | through
50. On further information and belief, the factors supporting the alter ego status of Mr. KWAK and
DOES | through 50, on the one hand, and DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY
CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., on the other hand, include but are not limited to the following:
A Mr. KWAK and DOES 1 through 50 have improperly managed, controlled,
operated and dominated DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/o/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE
SALON BOSCO, INC., commingling their assets;
B Mr. KWAK and DOES 1 through 50 have misrepresented the identity of the
10 responsible ownership, management and financial interest of the entities DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC.,
1! d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., and they have concealed the personal
12 business activities of DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE
13 SALON BOSCO, INC.;
14 Cc Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50 have failed to maintain arm’s length
15 relationships with DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON
16 BOSCO, INC.;
17 D Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50 filed or caused to be filed as corporations
18 DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. with
19 the intention of transferring existing liability among these Defendant corporations;
20) E Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50 dictate the day-to-day business of
2 21 DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. and
Be
£222 control the implementation of company policies and procedures;
oR
6223 FE DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE
gD
om
“24 SALON BOSCO, INC. share the same employees and are essentially shell entities created by Mr. KWAK
25 and DOES | through 50 to attempt to avoid personal liability, such that it would be inequitable to hold
26 only DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC.
27 liable for certain acts and omissions described herein.
28
4
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e @
10, Atall relevant times herein, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, were the joint
2 employers of PLAINTIFF. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times
3 material to this complaint DEFENDANTS were the alter egos, divisions, affiliates, integrated enterprises,
|| joint employers, subsidiaries, parents, principals, related entities, co-conspirators, authorized agents,
5 partners, joint venturers, and/or guarantors, actual or ostensible, of each other. Each Defendant was
6|| completely dominated by his, her, or its co-Defendant, and each was the alter ego of the other.
ll. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each and every
Defendant was the authorized agent, principal, partner, joint venturer, guarantor, actual or ostensible, of
the other DEFENDANTS and had full authority to perform the actions alleged herein, unless alleged
10 otherwise. Furthermore, each and every Defendant was operating within the course and scope of their
11 agency, or as principal, partner, joint venturer, guarantor, actual or ostensible, relationship with the other
12 DEFENDANTS during the course of events described herein, unless alleged otherwise. To the extent that
13 certain actions and omissions were perpetrated by certain DEFENDANTS, the remaining DEFENDANTS
14 condoned, authorized, and ratified such acts and omissions.
15 12, Whenever reference is made in this complaint to any act or failure to act by a
16 Defendant or DEFENDANTS, such allegations and reference shall also be deemed to mean the acts and
17 failures to act of each Defendant acting individually, jointly, and severally. Whenever reference is made
18 to individuals who are not named as PLAINTIFF or DEFENDANTS in this complaint, but who were
19 employees/agents of DEFENDANTS, such individuals acted on behalf of DEFENDANTS within the
20 course and scope of their employment.
13. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times
2
te,
be22) herein DEFENDANTS, and/or their agents/employees, knew or reasonably should have known that unless
a
523 they intervened to protect PLAINTIFF, and to adequately supervise, prohibit, control, regulate, discipline,
gD
oo
=a 24 and/or otherwise penalize the conduct of the employees of DEFENDANTS, as set forth herein, the
25 remaining DEFENDANTS and employees perceived the acts and omissions as being ratified and
26) condoned.
27 STATEMENT OF FACTS
28 14, On or about October 2014, PLAINTIFF commenced employment as a pastry chef with
5
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
DEFENDANTS in their bakery and warehouse facility located at 1750 Cordova Street, Los Angeles,
CA 90007.
15. At all relevant times herein, DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK was PLAINTIFF’s direct
supervisor.
16. Immediately after commencement of her employment, and continuing thereafter,
PLAINTIFF was subjected to sexual harassment and battery by DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK. The
foregoing acts of sexual harassment perpetrated upon PLAINTIFF by DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK
include, but are not limited to, the following:
A. On numerous occasions, Mr. KWAK would walk by and stare at PLAINTIFF;
10| B. On numerous occasions, Mr. KWAK asked PLAINTIFF to kiss him;
1] Cc Mr. KWAK frequently touched PLAINTIFF inappropriately, including slapping her
12 buttocks;
13 D On one occasion, Mr. KWAK struck PLAINTIFF on the buttocks with a ruler;
14 E On one occasion, Mr. KWAK gave PLAINTIFF a ride to work. Upon arriving at
15 the corner of Vermont Ave. and Cordova St., Mr. KWAK parked his car approximately 100 meters from
16 the factory where PLAINTIFF was working, which is located at 1750 Cordova Street. While still inside
17 the vehicle, Mr. KWAK leaned toward Ms. Rodriguez and demanded “one kiss, please!” PLAINTIFF
18 immediately responded “no” and pushed him away. A few seconds after, Mr. KWAK again leaned over
19 toward Ms. Rodriguez and stated “just one kiss, please!” This time, PLAINTIFF was unable to push him
20) away in time, and Mr. KWAK kissed her once on the a PLAINTIFF immediately responded by telling
21 him “don’t do that again.” PLAINTIFF then exited the vehicle and walked to the factory. At that time, Mr.
eo
222
eo
KWAK drove away, and did not return to the factory for several hours;
ae
ho= 23 F On one occasion, on or around December 24, 2014, Mr. KWAK asked PLAINTIFF
a
24
és to stay behind after the rest of the staff had left so that he could teach her how to do the holiday-themed
25 pastry decorations. After the lesson concluded, PLAINTIFE went to the locker room to change and
26 retrieve her personal items. PLAINTIFF was unaware that Mr. KWAK had been following her closely
27 from behind. Once inside the locker room, Mr. KWAK grabbed PLAINTIFF’s arms and pulled her toward
28 him. Mr. KWAK then proceeded to wrap both his arms around her upper body, pinning her in place. Mr.
6
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e @
KWAK told PLAINTIFF “Why won’t you do it with me? There’s nothing wrong!” PLAINTIFF
attempted to push Mr. KWAK away, telling him “no” and “leave me alone.” Mr. KWAK then moved one
hand under her shirt, making skin-to-skin contact with her lower back. PLAINTIFF continued to struggle
while Mr. KWAK moved his hand up her back and unhooked her bra strap. Mr. KWAK then proceeded to
grope and fondle both of her breasts. Soon after, PLAINTIFF managed to break free and run out of the
locker room. In the process of fleeing Mr. KWAK’s attack, PLAINTIFF sustained injury to her ankle
when kicking boxes out of the way to try to reach the door. PLAINTIFF felt that if she could not escape,
Mr. KWAK would rape her. Upon exiting, PLAINTIFF encountered another male employee, who saw
she was distressed. The male employee escorted PLAINTIFF outside and waited with her until her bus
10 arrived. On December 28, 2014, PLAINTIFF reported the incident to the Los Angeles Police Department;
i G On numerous occasions after PLAINTIFF rejected Mr. KWAK, Mr. KWAK would
12 scream at PLAINTIFF about minor issues, such as yelling at her to “hurry up” when she was working;
13 H On the two days following the incident that occurred on or around December 24,
14 2014, PLAINTIFF was afraid to be around Mr. KWAK and she avoided him at work. PLAINTIFF would
15 ask her co-workers if they needed help with something so that she would not have to speak to Mr. KWAK.
16 However, Mr. KWAK sought out PLAINTIFF and retaliated against her for resisting his physical
17 invasions (including, pushing away from him as he sexually battered her) by constantly screaming at
18 PLAINTIFF in front of the other employees, telling her to “hurry up,” telling her that she was not using
19 her time efficiently and that she was not good for anything.
20) I On or around December 26, 2014, PLAINTIFF could no longer suffer Mr.
21 KWAK’s abuse, and due to the violence and battery he inflicted on her two days earlier, PLAINTIFF
Qe
fe
ne 22) threw her apron on the table and told Mr. KWAK that she was leaving.
q>
no 23 J On numerous occasions, Mr. KWAK would call PLAINTIFF'S personal cell phone
go
me
a 24 and leave voice messages. Even after PLAINTIFF’s employment with DEFENDANTS ended, Mr.
25 KWAK continued to call and leave messages asking her to return to work at DEFENDANTS.
26 PLAINTIFF changed her phone number so that Mr. KWAK would no longer be able to call her.
27 1 7. Throughout her employment with DEFENDANTS and working under Mr. KWAK’s
28 supervision, PLAINTIFF was subjected to a sexually harassing and hostile work environment.
7
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e @
PLAINTIFF is informed and believes that other female employees have also been sexually harassed by
Mr. KWAK and experienced a hostile work environment. The corporate DEFENDANTS knew or should
have known about the sexual harassment and battery by PLAINTIFF’s supervisor Mr. KWAK against
PLAINTIFF but failed to investigate, prevent and/or correct the harassment.
18. As indicated herein, PLAINTIFF rejected all sexual advances from Mr. KWAK and
physically resisted Mr. KWAK’s acts of sexual battery. However, Mr. KWAK refused to change his
conduct.
INJURIES TO PLAINTIFF
19, As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing unlawful and malicious acts of
10 DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF has suffered and will continue to suffer, great mental and emotional
11 anguish. Moreover, PLAINTIFF has been humiliated and embarrassed as a result of the foregoing acts of
12 DEFENDANTS.
13 20. Asa further direct and proximate result of the foregoing unlawful and malicious acts of
14 DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF has suffered from loss of earnings in amounts as yet unascertained, but
15 subject to proof at trial, and within the jurisdiction of this Court.
16
17 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
18 Sexual Battery
(Civil Code § 1708.5)
19 (Against all Defendants)
20 21. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the
21 allegations in paragraphs | through 20.
fs
be22 22. As set forth above, DEFENDANTS’ acts and omissions constitute common law tort, as
gO
523 well as violations of California Civil Code § 1708.5.
gq
724 23. As set forth above, Mr. KWAK intentionally and recklessly committed acts that resulted in
25 offensive contact with PLAINTIFF’s person, including but not limited to forcibly grabbing PLAINTIFF’s
26 breasts.
27 24. Mr. KWAK committed the aforementioned acts with the deliberate intention of causing a
28 harmful or offensive contact to the body of PLAINTIFF.
8
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
25. At no time during the events described herein did PLAINTIFF consent to Mr. KWAK’s
conduct.
26. Asa further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of DEFENDANTS, and each of
them, as aforesaid, PLAINTIFF has been caused to and did suffer and continues to suffer from severe
emotional and mental distress, anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort,
depression and anxiety. PLAINTIFF does not know at this time the exact duration or permanence of said
injuries, but is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that some if not all of the injuries are
reasonably certain to be permanent in character.
27. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that the DEFENDANTS, and
10 each of them, by engaging in the aforementioned acts and by ratifying, aiding and inciting such acts,
11 engaged in wilful, malicious, intentional, oppressive and despicable conduct, and acted with wilful and
12 conscious disregard of PLAINTIFF’s rights, welfare, and safety, thereby justifying an award of punitive
13 and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
14
15 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Battery
14 (Against all Defendants)
17 28. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the
18 allegations in paragraphs | through 27.
19 29. The conduct of DEFENDANTS, and each of them, as set forth above, constitutes
20} intentional harmful and/or offensive contact with PLAINTIFF’S person.
21 30. PLAINTIFF did not consent to the foregoing conduct perpetrated by DEFENDANTS.
ee
7 22 31. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS?’ unlawful acts, practices, and
tem
a 23
omissions, PLAINTIFF has suffered humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional distress, in
ne
@
= 24
sa an amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages.
25) 32, The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein were intentional, reckless
| 26) and willful, and caused great physical and emotional harm to PLAINTIFF. Therefore, an award of
27 punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them from
28 similar conduct in the future, should be made.
9
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Violence or Intimidation By Threat of Violence
Civil Code § 51.7 (Ralphs Civil Rights Act)
(Against all Defendants)
33, PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the
allegations in paragraphs 1 through 32.
34, California Civil Code § 51.7, the “Ralphs Civil Rights Act,” prohibits violence or threats of
violence against a person based on his or her actual or perceived sex, race, color, or religion.
35. As set forth above, DEFENDANTS committed violent acts against PLAINTIFF which
10 were motivated by her gender. DEFENDANTS ' acts and omissions constitute violations of California
11 Civil Code § 51.7.
12 36. California Civil Code § 51.7 broadly provides that all persons have the right to be free from
13 violence and intimidation by threat of violence based on, among other things, race, religion, ancestry,
14) national origin, political affiliation, sex, or position in a labor dispute. Under California Civil Code § 52, a
15 person may bring a private right of action for damages against anyone who deprives them of theirs rights
16 under Section 51.7, including those who aid, incite, or conspire in such deprivation.. California Civil Code
17 § 52(b). California Civil Code § 52.1 allows a civil action for damages and equitable relief for
18 interference, by threats, intimidation or coercion, with the exercise of constitutional or other rights
19 provided by law. Attorneys’ fees may be awarded under both statutes. California Civil Code §§ 52(b)(3)
20 and 52.1(h). By reason of DEF) ENDANTS' unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, PLAINTIFF has
21 uffered monetary damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional distress, in an
2
= 22 amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages.
ee
2no23 37. The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein violated California Civil
= 24
ge
Code § 51.7, Therefore, pursuant to California Civil Code § 52(b)(1), an award of punitive damages,
25 sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them and others from similar
26 conduct in the future should be made. Additionally, PLAINTIFF is entitled to a civil penalty in the
27 amount of $25,000.00 pursuant to California Civil Code § 52(b)(2).
28)
10
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Gender Violence
Civil Code § 52.4
(Against Defendant Mr. KWAK)
38. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the
allegations in paragraphs | through 37.
39. California Civil Code § 52.4 provides that any person who has been subjected to gender
violence may bring a civil action for damages against any responsible party. Under this section, “gender
violence” means a form of sex discrimination involving either: 1) one or more acts that would constitute a
criminal offense under state law that has as an element the use, or attempted or threatened use of physical
10 force against the person or property of another, committed at least in part based on the gender of the
11 victim, or 2) a physical invasion of a sexual nature under coercive conditions, whether or not those acts
12 have resulted in criminal complaints, charges, prosecution, or conviction. California Civil Code § 52.4(c).
13 A party seeking relief under Civil Code 52.4 may seek actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive
14 damages, injunctive relief, any combination of those, or any other appropriate relief. A prevailing plaintiff
15 may also be awarded attorney's fees and cost. California Civil Code § 52.4(a).
16 40. As set forth above, DEFENDANT’s acts and omissions constitute violations of California
17 Civil Code § 52.4.
18 41. By reason of DEFENDANT’s unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, PLAINTIFF has
19 suffered monetary damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional distress, in an
20 amount subject to proof at trial.
21 42, The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein were intentional,
fm
eo 22 reckless and willful, and caused great physical and emotional harm to PLAINTIFF. Therefore, an award
we
he 23 of punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them from
2
>
weed 24 similar conduct in the future, should be made.
25 i
26 Mt
27 i
28)
u
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
(Against all Defendants)
43. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the
allegations in paragraphs | through 42.
44, In committing the outrageous and malicious acts and omissions complained of herein,
DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK knew or should have known that his conduct would result in severe emotional
distress to PLAINTIFF. Moreover, Mr. KWAK’s acts and omissions were perpetrated with the intent of
inflicting humiliation, mental anguish, and severe emotional distress upon PLAINTIFF.
10 45, The corporate DEFENDANTS have condoned, ratified, aided or incited Mr. KWAK’s
1 conduct, as set forth above, by failing to criticize, terminate, suspend or otherwise sanction or take any
12 action against Mr. KWAK, once they were informed of Mr. KWAK’s sexually predatory and harassing
13 conduct toward PLAINTIFF.
14 46. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS’ unlawful acts, practices, and
15 omissions, PLAINTIFF has suffered monetary damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and
16 emotional distress, in an amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages
17 together with pre-judgment interest thereon pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any
18 other applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest.
19 47. The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein were intentional,
20 reckless and willful, and caused great physical and emotional harm to PLAINTIFF. Therefore, an award
21 of punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them from
fm
be~~ 22| similar conduct in the future, should be made. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages together with
go
= 23
no” pre-judgment interest thereon pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other
2
=324 applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest.
25 M
26 Hl
27 Hf
28 Hf
12
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Wrongful Constructive Discharge in Violation of Public Policy
(Against DEFENDANTS CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO
BAKERY CAFE, DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, and DOES | through 50)
48. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the
allegations in paragraphs | through 47.
49. At all times relevant to this action, Article I, Section 8 of the California Constitution, the
Ralph Civil Rights Act, Civil Code § 51.7, and Civil Code § 52.4 were in full force and effect and were
binding on DEFENDANTS. Among other things, Article I, Section 8 of the California Constitution, the
10 Ralph Civil Rights Act, Civil Code § 51.7, and Civil Code § 52.4 prohibit DEFENDANTS from depriving
11 PLAINTIFF of her right to be free from violence, intimidation or threats, and to bé free from violence
12 motivated by her gender.
13 50. Bach of the aforementioned statutes embodies a fundamental and well-established public
14 policy in the State of California.
15 51. PLAINTIFF believes, and thereon alleges, that DEFENDANTS’ conduct as set forth
16 above exposed PLAINTIFF to violence and intimidation, as well as violence on the basis of her gender.
17 Accordingly, PLAINTIFF was subject to working conditions by Defendants that violated public policy.
18 52. DEFENDANTS knowingly and/or intentionally permitted such working conditions that
19 were so intolerable that a reasonable person in PLAINTIFF’s position would have had no reasonable
20 alternative except to resign. PLAINTIFF was forced to quit because of DEFENDANTS’ intolerable
21 working conditions, which were a substantial factor in causing PLAINTIFF’s harm.
2
222
pe 53. As a proximate result of DEFENDANTS’ unlawful acts, practices, and omissions,
a2
=
Nn
23 PLAINTIFF has suffered money damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional
ee
re 24)
oral distress, in an amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages together with
25 prejudgment interest thereon pursuant to Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other applicable provision
26| providing for prejudgment interest.
27 54, By engaging in the aforementioned unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, and by
28 ratifying such acts, practices, and omissions, DEFENDANTS’ conduct intended to cause injury to
13
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e e
PLAINTIFF was reckless, malicious, and despicable, and was carried on with a conscious and willful
disregard of the rights and safety of others. Therefore, PLAINTIFF seeks an award of punitive damages,
sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter similar conduct in the future, in
an amount according to proof at trial, together with prejudgment interest thereon pursuant to California
Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288 and/or any other applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF respectfully prays for relief against DEFENDANTS as follows:
55. Enter a declaratory judgment that the acts and practices of DEFENDANTS and its agents
and employees as set forth herein violate the foregoing provisions of law.
10 56. Direct DEFENDANTS to take such affirmative steps as may be necessary and appropriate
i to correct the effect of its past unlawful acts and practices.
12 57. For compensatory damages on the PLAINTIFF’s economic losses, deprivation of civil
13 rights, humiliation, physical anguish, and mental and emotional distress, in an amount to be ascertained at
14] trial.
15 58. An award of punitive damages against DEFENDANTS pursuant to the cause of action for
16 violation of Civil Code § 1708.5, the cause of action for violation of Civil Code §§ 51.7, 52, 52.4, and the
17 common law torts of Battery and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.
18} 59. A civil penalty in the amount of $25,000.00 pursuant to Civil Code § 52(b)(2).
19 60. Award PLAINTIFF the costs and expenses of this action, including reasonable attorneys’
20) fees pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 52, 52.1, and 52.4.
21 61. For interest accrued to date pursuant to Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other
22
QP
applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest;
we
a 23} /
ne
& 24 Mt
Sead
25 H
26 if
27
28 it
14
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
e @
62 Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper,
DATED: February 17, 2017 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC
UIE TAATTHEWE MATERN
DALIA KHALILI
SHAYNA E. DICKSTEIN
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Medari Rodriguez
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
10
1]
Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, hereby demands a jury trial with
12
respect to all issues triable of right by jury.
14
15 DATED: February 17, 2017 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC
16
17
18
LOT
MATTHEW Jv] S{ATERN
19 DALIA KHALILI
SHAYNA E. DICKSTEIN
20 Attorneys for Plaintiff
Medari Rodriguez
21
@P
fa
~~ 22|
a
Be= 23)
24
~d
25
26)
27
28
15
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
PROOF OF SERVICE
IT am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of
eighteen (18) years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 1230 Rosecrans
Avenue, Suite 200, Manhattan Beach, California 90266.
On April 6, 2017, I served the document described as
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Xl By United States mail. I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons at the address listed below (specify one):
oO Deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the postage
fully prepaid.
10
Xx Placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business
practices. | am readily familiar with the business’s practices for collecting and
ll
processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is
placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business
12 with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.
13 Tam a resident or employed in the county where mailing occurred. The envelope or package
was placed in the mail at Manhattan Beach, California.
14
15 Thomas J. Ryu, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants DELIZIA, INC.,
RYU LAW FIRM, APC CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. and
16 3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2050 BRANDON KWAK
Los Angeles, CA 90010
17
Phone: (213) 380-9200
18 Fax: (213) 380-9302
19
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
20 is true and correct.
2 21
fe Executed on April 6, 2017, at Manhattan Beach, California.
ee 22
Ge t-
eo
Bh? 23
gD
ao
wd Eva Reyes
24
25
26
27
28
1
PROOF OF SERVICE
Preview
e OR@INAL MATERN LAW GROUP, PC MATTHEW J. MATERN (SBN 159798) mmatern@maternlawgroup.com DALIA KHALILI (SBN 253840) FI dkhalili@maternlawgroup.com Superior Court of California SHAYNA E. DICKSTEIN (SBN 290844) County of Los Angeles sdickstein@maternlawgroup.com 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 APR G7 2017 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Sherri R, Carte, ecyitiye Officer/Clerk Tel: (310) 531-1900 By. , Deputy Facsimile: (310) 531-1901 Attorneys for Plaintiff MEDARI RODRIGUEZ, 10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA i COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 12 MEDARI JAMILETH RODRIGUEZ Case No. BC635730 D SY 13 ~ 3 MARTINEZ, an individual, Ww 14 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR: < 15 Plaintiff, Sexual Battery (Civil Code § 1708.5) "Ty Battery (Civil Code § 52) 16 Violence or Intimidation By Threat of Vv. Violence (Civil Code § 51.7) 17 Gender Violence (Civil Code § 52.4) DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 18 California corporation; CAKE SALON BOSCO, Wrongful Constructive Discharge in INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO Violation of Public Policy 19 BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation; BRANDON KWAK, an individual; and DOES 1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 20) through 50, inclusive, 21 Defendants. fe 22 we 2 23 no @> re 24 él 25 26 27] 28 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e NATURE OF THE ACTION 1 This civil rights action is brought to remedy DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation; CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation, BRANDON KWAK, an individual; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive (collectively, “DEFENDANTS”)’ practices of sexual harassment, sexual battery, violence, related civil rights violations, and tortious acts, PLAINTIFF MEDARI JAMILETH RODRIGUEZ MARTINEZ (“PLAINTIFF” or “Ms. Rodriguez”) seeks compensatory and punitive damages, penalties, and attomeys’ fees. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 10 2 The Superior Court of the State of California has personal jurisdiction in this matter 11 because PLAINTIFF is a resident of the State of California, and DEFENDANTS are qualified to do 12 business in California and regularly conduct business in California. Further, no federal question is at issue 13 because the claims are based solely on California law. 14 3 Venue is proper in this judicial district and the County of Los Angeles, California because 15 PLAINTIFF performed work for DEFENDANTS in the County of Los Angeles, DEFENDANTS 16 maintain offices and facilities and transact business in the County of Los Angeles, and DEFENDANTS' 17 unlawful actions and omissions giving rise to this action occurred in the County of Los Angeles. 18 PLAINTIFF 19 4 PLAINTIFF is a female resident of the State of California. At all relevant times herein, 20 PLAINTIFF was employed as a baker in the DEFENDANTS’ bakery and warehouse facility in the 21 County of Los Angeles from on or about October 2014 until on or about December 26, 2014. 2 Be eo 22 DEFENDANTS @ he 23 5 Atall relevant times herein, PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that @oe nel 24 DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation is, and at all times relevant 25 hereto was, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California. 26 PLAINTIFF is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO 27 BAKERY CAFE is authorized to conduct business in the State of California, and does conduct business in 28 the State of California. Specifically, upon information and belief, DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO 2 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e BAKERY CAFE maintains offices and facilities and conducts business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. 6 Atall relevant times herein, PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, a California corporation is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California. PLAINTIFF is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE is authorized to conduct business in the State of California, and does conduct business in the State of California. Specifically, upon information and belief, CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO 10 BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE maintains offices and facilities and conducts business in the 11 County of Los Angeles, State of California. 12 7 Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the defendant harasser, 13 BRANDON KWAK (“Mr. KWAK”), is an individual residing in the State of California. At all relevant 14 times herein, Mr. KWAK was employed by the corporate DEFENDANTS and was PLAINTIFF’s direct 15 supervisor and employer. At all relevant times herein, Mr. KWAK was the corporate DEFENDANTS’ 16 managing agent, and acted within the course and scope of his employment and/or as an agent of 17 DEFENDANTS during the events described herein, and through his specific actions, caused the violations 18 of law about which PLAINTIFF now complains: 19 8 The true names and capacities of DOES | through 50, inclusive, are unknown to 20 PLAINTIFF at this time, and PLAINTIFF therefore sues such DEFENDANTS under fictitious names. 21 PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each DEFENDANT designated as a DOE ee = 22 ee is highly responsible in some manner for the events and happenings referred to herein, and legally caused a nD23 the injuries and damages alleged in this Complaint. PLAINTIFF will seek leave of the court to amend this 24 od Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained. 25 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that a unity of interest and 26 ownership has existed and presently exists between Mr. KWAK and DOES 1 through 50, on the one hand, 27 and DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., 28 d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, on the other hand, such that any individuality and 3 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e separateness between them has ceased, and DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. were and are the alter egos of Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50. On further information and belief, the factors supporting the alter ego status of Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50, on the one hand, and DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., on the other hand, include but are not limited to the following: A Mr. KWAK and DOES 1 through 50 have improperly managed, controlled, operated and dominated DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/o/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., commingling their assets; B Mr. KWAK and DOES 1 through 50 have misrepresented the identity of the 10 responsible ownership, management and financial interest of the entities DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., 1! d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., and they have concealed the personal 12 business activities of DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE 13 SALON BOSCO, INC.; 14 Cc Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50 have failed to maintain arm’s length 15 relationships with DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON 16 BOSCO, INC.; 17 D Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50 filed or caused to be filed as corporations 18 DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. with 19 the intention of transferring existing liability among these Defendant corporations; 20) E Mr. KWAK and DOES | through 50 dictate the day-to-day business of 2 21 DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. and Be £222 control the implementation of company policies and procedures; oR 6223 FE DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE gD om “24 SALON BOSCO, INC. share the same employees and are essentially shell entities created by Mr. KWAK 25 and DOES | through 50 to attempt to avoid personal liability, such that it would be inequitable to hold 26 only DEFENDANTS DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE and CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. 27 liable for certain acts and omissions described herein. 28 4 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e @ 10, Atall relevant times herein, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, were the joint 2 employers of PLAINTIFF. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times 3 material to this complaint DEFENDANTS were the alter egos, divisions, affiliates, integrated enterprises, || joint employers, subsidiaries, parents, principals, related entities, co-conspirators, authorized agents, 5 partners, joint venturers, and/or guarantors, actual or ostensible, of each other. Each Defendant was 6|| completely dominated by his, her, or its co-Defendant, and each was the alter ego of the other. ll. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each and every Defendant was the authorized agent, principal, partner, joint venturer, guarantor, actual or ostensible, of the other DEFENDANTS and had full authority to perform the actions alleged herein, unless alleged 10 otherwise. Furthermore, each and every Defendant was operating within the course and scope of their 11 agency, or as principal, partner, joint venturer, guarantor, actual or ostensible, relationship with the other 12 DEFENDANTS during the course of events described herein, unless alleged otherwise. To the extent that 13 certain actions and omissions were perpetrated by certain DEFENDANTS, the remaining DEFENDANTS 14 condoned, authorized, and ratified such acts and omissions. 15 12, Whenever reference is made in this complaint to any act or failure to act by a 16 Defendant or DEFENDANTS, such allegations and reference shall also be deemed to mean the acts and 17 failures to act of each Defendant acting individually, jointly, and severally. Whenever reference is made 18 to individuals who are not named as PLAINTIFF or DEFENDANTS in this complaint, but who were 19 employees/agents of DEFENDANTS, such individuals acted on behalf of DEFENDANTS within the 20 course and scope of their employment. 13. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times 2 te, be22) herein DEFENDANTS, and/or their agents/employees, knew or reasonably should have known that unless a 523 they intervened to protect PLAINTIFF, and to adequately supervise, prohibit, control, regulate, discipline, gD oo =a 24 and/or otherwise penalize the conduct of the employees of DEFENDANTS, as set forth herein, the 25 remaining DEFENDANTS and employees perceived the acts and omissions as being ratified and 26) condoned. 27 STATEMENT OF FACTS 28 14, On or about October 2014, PLAINTIFF commenced employment as a pastry chef with 5 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e DEFENDANTS in their bakery and warehouse facility located at 1750 Cordova Street, Los Angeles, CA 90007. 15. At all relevant times herein, DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK was PLAINTIFF’s direct supervisor. 16. Immediately after commencement of her employment, and continuing thereafter, PLAINTIFF was subjected to sexual harassment and battery by DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK. The foregoing acts of sexual harassment perpetrated upon PLAINTIFF by DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK include, but are not limited to, the following: A. On numerous occasions, Mr. KWAK would walk by and stare at PLAINTIFF; 10| B. On numerous occasions, Mr. KWAK asked PLAINTIFF to kiss him; 1] Cc Mr. KWAK frequently touched PLAINTIFF inappropriately, including slapping her 12 buttocks; 13 D On one occasion, Mr. KWAK struck PLAINTIFF on the buttocks with a ruler; 14 E On one occasion, Mr. KWAK gave PLAINTIFF a ride to work. Upon arriving at 15 the corner of Vermont Ave. and Cordova St., Mr. KWAK parked his car approximately 100 meters from 16 the factory where PLAINTIFF was working, which is located at 1750 Cordova Street. While still inside 17 the vehicle, Mr. KWAK leaned toward Ms. Rodriguez and demanded “one kiss, please!” PLAINTIFF 18 immediately responded “no” and pushed him away. A few seconds after, Mr. KWAK again leaned over 19 toward Ms. Rodriguez and stated “just one kiss, please!” This time, PLAINTIFF was unable to push him 20) away in time, and Mr. KWAK kissed her once on the a PLAINTIFF immediately responded by telling 21 him “don’t do that again.” PLAINTIFF then exited the vehicle and walked to the factory. At that time, Mr. eo 222 eo KWAK drove away, and did not return to the factory for several hours; ae ho= 23 F On one occasion, on or around December 24, 2014, Mr. KWAK asked PLAINTIFF a 24 és to stay behind after the rest of the staff had left so that he could teach her how to do the holiday-themed 25 pastry decorations. After the lesson concluded, PLAINTIFE went to the locker room to change and 26 retrieve her personal items. PLAINTIFF was unaware that Mr. KWAK had been following her closely 27 from behind. Once inside the locker room, Mr. KWAK grabbed PLAINTIFF’s arms and pulled her toward 28 him. Mr. KWAK then proceeded to wrap both his arms around her upper body, pinning her in place. Mr. 6 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e @ KWAK told PLAINTIFF “Why won’t you do it with me? There’s nothing wrong!” PLAINTIFF attempted to push Mr. KWAK away, telling him “no” and “leave me alone.” Mr. KWAK then moved one hand under her shirt, making skin-to-skin contact with her lower back. PLAINTIFF continued to struggle while Mr. KWAK moved his hand up her back and unhooked her bra strap. Mr. KWAK then proceeded to grope and fondle both of her breasts. Soon after, PLAINTIFF managed to break free and run out of the locker room. In the process of fleeing Mr. KWAK’s attack, PLAINTIFF sustained injury to her ankle when kicking boxes out of the way to try to reach the door. PLAINTIFF felt that if she could not escape, Mr. KWAK would rape her. Upon exiting, PLAINTIFF encountered another male employee, who saw she was distressed. The male employee escorted PLAINTIFF outside and waited with her until her bus 10 arrived. On December 28, 2014, PLAINTIFF reported the incident to the Los Angeles Police Department; i G On numerous occasions after PLAINTIFF rejected Mr. KWAK, Mr. KWAK would 12 scream at PLAINTIFF about minor issues, such as yelling at her to “hurry up” when she was working; 13 H On the two days following the incident that occurred on or around December 24, 14 2014, PLAINTIFF was afraid to be around Mr. KWAK and she avoided him at work. PLAINTIFF would 15 ask her co-workers if they needed help with something so that she would not have to speak to Mr. KWAK. 16 However, Mr. KWAK sought out PLAINTIFF and retaliated against her for resisting his physical 17 invasions (including, pushing away from him as he sexually battered her) by constantly screaming at 18 PLAINTIFF in front of the other employees, telling her to “hurry up,” telling her that she was not using 19 her time efficiently and that she was not good for anything. 20) I On or around December 26, 2014, PLAINTIFF could no longer suffer Mr. 21 KWAK’s abuse, and due to the violence and battery he inflicted on her two days earlier, PLAINTIFF Qe fe ne 22) threw her apron on the table and told Mr. KWAK that she was leaving. q> no 23 J On numerous occasions, Mr. KWAK would call PLAINTIFF'S personal cell phone go me a 24 and leave voice messages. Even after PLAINTIFF’s employment with DEFENDANTS ended, Mr. 25 KWAK continued to call and leave messages asking her to return to work at DEFENDANTS. 26 PLAINTIFF changed her phone number so that Mr. KWAK would no longer be able to call her. 27 1 7. Throughout her employment with DEFENDANTS and working under Mr. KWAK’s 28 supervision, PLAINTIFF was subjected to a sexually harassing and hostile work environment. 7 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e @ PLAINTIFF is informed and believes that other female employees have also been sexually harassed by Mr. KWAK and experienced a hostile work environment. The corporate DEFENDANTS knew or should have known about the sexual harassment and battery by PLAINTIFF’s supervisor Mr. KWAK against PLAINTIFF but failed to investigate, prevent and/or correct the harassment. 18. As indicated herein, PLAINTIFF rejected all sexual advances from Mr. KWAK and physically resisted Mr. KWAK’s acts of sexual battery. However, Mr. KWAK refused to change his conduct. INJURIES TO PLAINTIFF 19, As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing unlawful and malicious acts of 10 DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF has suffered and will continue to suffer, great mental and emotional 11 anguish. Moreover, PLAINTIFF has been humiliated and embarrassed as a result of the foregoing acts of 12 DEFENDANTS. 13 20. Asa further direct and proximate result of the foregoing unlawful and malicious acts of 14 DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF has suffered from loss of earnings in amounts as yet unascertained, but 15 subject to proof at trial, and within the jurisdiction of this Court. 16 17 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 18 Sexual Battery (Civil Code § 1708.5) 19 (Against all Defendants) 20 21. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the 21 allegations in paragraphs | through 20. fs be22 22. As set forth above, DEFENDANTS’ acts and omissions constitute common law tort, as gO 523 well as violations of California Civil Code § 1708.5. gq 724 23. As set forth above, Mr. KWAK intentionally and recklessly committed acts that resulted in 25 offensive contact with PLAINTIFF’s person, including but not limited to forcibly grabbing PLAINTIFF’s 26 breasts. 27 24. Mr. KWAK committed the aforementioned acts with the deliberate intention of causing a 28 harmful or offensive contact to the body of PLAINTIFF. 8 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e 25. At no time during the events described herein did PLAINTIFF consent to Mr. KWAK’s conduct. 26. Asa further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of DEFENDANTS, and each of them, as aforesaid, PLAINTIFF has been caused to and did suffer and continues to suffer from severe emotional and mental distress, anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, depression and anxiety. PLAINTIFF does not know at this time the exact duration or permanence of said injuries, but is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that some if not all of the injuries are reasonably certain to be permanent in character. 27. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that the DEFENDANTS, and 10 each of them, by engaging in the aforementioned acts and by ratifying, aiding and inciting such acts, 11 engaged in wilful, malicious, intentional, oppressive and despicable conduct, and acted with wilful and 12 conscious disregard of PLAINTIFF’s rights, welfare, and safety, thereby justifying an award of punitive 13 and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at trial. 14 15 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Battery 14 (Against all Defendants) 17 28. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the 18 allegations in paragraphs | through 27. 19 29. The conduct of DEFENDANTS, and each of them, as set forth above, constitutes 20} intentional harmful and/or offensive contact with PLAINTIFF’S person. 21 30. PLAINTIFF did not consent to the foregoing conduct perpetrated by DEFENDANTS. ee 7 22 31. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS?’ unlawful acts, practices, and tem a 23 omissions, PLAINTIFF has suffered humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional distress, in ne @ = 24 sa an amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages. 25) 32, The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein were intentional, reckless | 26) and willful, and caused great physical and emotional harm to PLAINTIFF. Therefore, an award of 27 punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them from 28 similar conduct in the future, should be made. 9 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Violence or Intimidation By Threat of Violence Civil Code § 51.7 (Ralphs Civil Rights Act) (Against all Defendants) 33, PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 32. 34, California Civil Code § 51.7, the “Ralphs Civil Rights Act,” prohibits violence or threats of violence against a person based on his or her actual or perceived sex, race, color, or religion. 35. As set forth above, DEFENDANTS committed violent acts against PLAINTIFF which 10 were motivated by her gender. DEFENDANTS ' acts and omissions constitute violations of California 11 Civil Code § 51.7. 12 36. California Civil Code § 51.7 broadly provides that all persons have the right to be free from 13 violence and intimidation by threat of violence based on, among other things, race, religion, ancestry, 14) national origin, political affiliation, sex, or position in a labor dispute. Under California Civil Code § 52, a 15 person may bring a private right of action for damages against anyone who deprives them of theirs rights 16 under Section 51.7, including those who aid, incite, or conspire in such deprivation.. California Civil Code 17 § 52(b). California Civil Code § 52.1 allows a civil action for damages and equitable relief for 18 interference, by threats, intimidation or coercion, with the exercise of constitutional or other rights 19 provided by law. Attorneys’ fees may be awarded under both statutes. California Civil Code §§ 52(b)(3) 20 and 52.1(h). By reason of DEF) ENDANTS' unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, PLAINTIFF has 21 uffered monetary damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional distress, in an 2 = 22 amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages. ee 2no23 37. The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein violated California Civil = 24 ge Code § 51.7, Therefore, pursuant to California Civil Code § 52(b)(1), an award of punitive damages, 25 sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them and others from similar 26 conduct in the future should be made. Additionally, PLAINTIFF is entitled to a civil penalty in the 27 amount of $25,000.00 pursuant to California Civil Code § 52(b)(2). 28) 10 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Gender Violence Civil Code § 52.4 (Against Defendant Mr. KWAK) 38. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the allegations in paragraphs | through 37. 39. California Civil Code § 52.4 provides that any person who has been subjected to gender violence may bring a civil action for damages against any responsible party. Under this section, “gender violence” means a form of sex discrimination involving either: 1) one or more acts that would constitute a criminal offense under state law that has as an element the use, or attempted or threatened use of physical 10 force against the person or property of another, committed at least in part based on the gender of the 11 victim, or 2) a physical invasion of a sexual nature under coercive conditions, whether or not those acts 12 have resulted in criminal complaints, charges, prosecution, or conviction. California Civil Code § 52.4(c). 13 A party seeking relief under Civil Code 52.4 may seek actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive 14 damages, injunctive relief, any combination of those, or any other appropriate relief. A prevailing plaintiff 15 may also be awarded attorney's fees and cost. California Civil Code § 52.4(a). 16 40. As set forth above, DEFENDANT’s acts and omissions constitute violations of California 17 Civil Code § 52.4. 18 41. By reason of DEFENDANT’s unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, PLAINTIFF has 19 suffered monetary damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional distress, in an 20 amount subject to proof at trial. 21 42, The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein were intentional, fm eo 22 reckless and willful, and caused great physical and emotional harm to PLAINTIFF. Therefore, an award we he 23 of punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them from 2 > weed 24 similar conduct in the future, should be made. 25 i 26 Mt 27 i 28) u FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Against all Defendants) 43. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the allegations in paragraphs | through 42. 44, In committing the outrageous and malicious acts and omissions complained of herein, DEFENDANT Mr. KWAK knew or should have known that his conduct would result in severe emotional distress to PLAINTIFF. Moreover, Mr. KWAK’s acts and omissions were perpetrated with the intent of inflicting humiliation, mental anguish, and severe emotional distress upon PLAINTIFF. 10 45, The corporate DEFENDANTS have condoned, ratified, aided or incited Mr. KWAK’s 1 conduct, as set forth above, by failing to criticize, terminate, suspend or otherwise sanction or take any 12 action against Mr. KWAK, once they were informed of Mr. KWAK’s sexually predatory and harassing 13 conduct toward PLAINTIFF. 14 46. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS’ unlawful acts, practices, and 15 omissions, PLAINTIFF has suffered monetary damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and 16 emotional distress, in an amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages 17 together with pre-judgment interest thereon pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any 18 other applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest. 19 47. The unlawful acts and practices of DEFENDANTS alleged herein were intentional, 20 reckless and willful, and caused great physical and emotional harm to PLAINTIFF. Therefore, an award 21 of punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter them from fm be~~ 22| similar conduct in the future, should be made. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages together with go = 23 no” pre-judgment interest thereon pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other 2 =324 applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest. 25 M 26 Hl 27 Hf 28 Hf 12 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Wrongful Constructive Discharge in Violation of Public Policy (Against DEFENDANTS CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY and BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, DELIZIA INC., d/b/a BOSCO BAKERY CAFE, and DOES | through 50) 48. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the allegations in paragraphs | through 47. 49. At all times relevant to this action, Article I, Section 8 of the California Constitution, the Ralph Civil Rights Act, Civil Code § 51.7, and Civil Code § 52.4 were in full force and effect and were binding on DEFENDANTS. Among other things, Article I, Section 8 of the California Constitution, the 10 Ralph Civil Rights Act, Civil Code § 51.7, and Civil Code § 52.4 prohibit DEFENDANTS from depriving 11 PLAINTIFF of her right to be free from violence, intimidation or threats, and to bé free from violence 12 motivated by her gender. 13 50. Bach of the aforementioned statutes embodies a fundamental and well-established public 14 policy in the State of California. 15 51. PLAINTIFF believes, and thereon alleges, that DEFENDANTS’ conduct as set forth 16 above exposed PLAINTIFF to violence and intimidation, as well as violence on the basis of her gender. 17 Accordingly, PLAINTIFF was subject to working conditions by Defendants that violated public policy. 18 52. DEFENDANTS knowingly and/or intentionally permitted such working conditions that 19 were so intolerable that a reasonable person in PLAINTIFF’s position would have had no reasonable 20 alternative except to resign. PLAINTIFF was forced to quit because of DEFENDANTS’ intolerable 21 working conditions, which were a substantial factor in causing PLAINTIFF’s harm. 2 222 pe 53. As a proximate result of DEFENDANTS’ unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, a2 = Nn 23 PLAINTIFF has suffered money damages, humiliation, mental anguish, and physical and emotional ee re 24) oral distress, in an amount subject to proof at trial. PLAINTIFF claims such amount as damages together with 25 prejudgment interest thereon pursuant to Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other applicable provision 26| providing for prejudgment interest. 27 54, By engaging in the aforementioned unlawful acts, practices, and omissions, and by 28 ratifying such acts, practices, and omissions, DEFENDANTS’ conduct intended to cause injury to 13 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e e PLAINTIFF was reckless, malicious, and despicable, and was carried on with a conscious and willful disregard of the rights and safety of others. Therefore, PLAINTIFF seeks an award of punitive damages, sufficient to punish DEFENDANTS and to serve as an example to deter similar conduct in the future, in an amount according to proof at trial, together with prejudgment interest thereon pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288 and/or any other applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF respectfully prays for relief against DEFENDANTS as follows: 55. Enter a declaratory judgment that the acts and practices of DEFENDANTS and its agents and employees as set forth herein violate the foregoing provisions of law. 10 56. Direct DEFENDANTS to take such affirmative steps as may be necessary and appropriate i to correct the effect of its past unlawful acts and practices. 12 57. For compensatory damages on the PLAINTIFF’s economic losses, deprivation of civil 13 rights, humiliation, physical anguish, and mental and emotional distress, in an amount to be ascertained at 14] trial. 15 58. An award of punitive damages against DEFENDANTS pursuant to the cause of action for 16 violation of Civil Code § 1708.5, the cause of action for violation of Civil Code §§ 51.7, 52, 52.4, and the 17 common law torts of Battery and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. 18} 59. A civil penalty in the amount of $25,000.00 pursuant to Civil Code § 52(b)(2). 19 60. Award PLAINTIFF the costs and expenses of this action, including reasonable attorneys’ 20) fees pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 52, 52.1, and 52.4. 21 61. For interest accrued to date pursuant to Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other 22 QP applicable provision providing for prejudgment interest; we a 23} / ne & 24 Mt Sead 25 H 26 if 27 28 it 14 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT e @ 62 Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper, DATED: February 17, 2017 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC UIE TAATTHEWE MATERN DALIA KHALILI SHAYNA E. DICKSTEIN Attorneys for Plaintiff Medari Rodriguez DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 10 1] Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, hereby demands a jury trial with 12 respect to all issues triable of right by jury. 14 15 DATED: February 17, 2017 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 16 17 18 LOT MATTHEW Jv] S{ATERN 19 DALIA KHALILI SHAYNA E. DICKSTEIN 20 Attorneys for Plaintiff Medari Rodriguez 21 @P fa ~~ 22| a Be= 23) 24 ~d 25 26) 27 28 15 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT PROOF OF SERVICE IT am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200, Manhattan Beach, California 90266. On April 6, 2017, I served the document described as FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Xl By United States mail. I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the address listed below (specify one): oO Deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the postage fully prepaid. 10 Xx Placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. | am readily familiar with the business’s practices for collecting and ll processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business 12 with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. 13 Tam a resident or employed in the county where mailing occurred. The envelope or package was placed in the mail at Manhattan Beach, California. 14 15 Thomas J. Ryu, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants DELIZIA, INC., RYU LAW FIRM, APC CAKE SALON BOSCO, INC. and 16 3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2050 BRANDON KWAK Los Angeles, CA 90010 17 Phone: (213) 380-9200 18 Fax: (213) 380-9302 19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing 20 is true and correct. 2 21 fe Executed on April 6, 2017, at Manhattan Beach, California. ee 22 Ge t- eo Bh? 23 gD ao wd Eva Reyes 24 25 26 27 28 1 PROOF OF SERVICE