This case was last updated from San Mateo County Superior Courts on 07/20/2018 at 17:12:46 (UTC).

JENNIFER HICKS ETAL VS STEVE DESEDARE ETAL

Case Summary

On 01/08/2013 JENNIFER HICKS ETAL filed a Labor - Other Labor lawsuit against STEVE DESEDARE ETAL. This case was filed in San Mateo County Superior Courts, Southern Branch Hall Of Justice And Records located in San Mateo, California. The Judges overseeing this case are Dylina, Steven L and Dylina, Steven L.. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *****8944

  • Filing Date:

    01/08/2013

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Labor - Other Labor

  • Court:

    San Mateo County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Southern Branch Hall Of Justice And Records

  • County, State:

    San Mateo, California

Judge Details

Judges

Dylina, Steven L

Dylina, Steven L.

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

JENNIFER HICKS, ONBEHALF OF HERSELF

ON BEHALF OFALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED

ON BEHALF OFALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED AND ON BEHALF OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS PRIVATE ATTY GENERAL

Defendants

STEVE DESEDARE

DAWG HOUSE PET SPA

DAWG HOUSE PET BATHING

DAWG HOUSE PET SPA A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM

DAWG HOUSE PET BATHING A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM

DESDARE, STEVE

DESEDARE, STEVE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

KEEGAN, DRU ANNE

Defendant Attorney

SMITH, CHARLES J.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Conditional Statement.

NOTICE (2) Comment NCS: NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT FILED BY JENNIFER HICKS ONBEHALF OF HERSELF

Stipulation and Order to ADR.

ORDER Comment SOADR: STIP AND ORDER TO ADR SIGNED BY STEVEN L. DYLINA ON 07/24/13

Fee Waiver Granted on Additional Court Fees.

ORDER - FEE WAIVER (2) Comment OWFGS: ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF ADDITIONAL COURT FEES AND COSTS FILED BY JENNIFER HICKS ONBEHALF OF HERSELF GRANTED FOR JURY FEES AND COURT REPORTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $150.00, SIGNED BY BF ON 06/24/13.

Case Management Statement.

STATEMENT (2) Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY JENNIFER HICKS ONBEHALF OF HERSELF.

Case Management Statement.

STATEMENT Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY STEVE DESEDARE.

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE (3) Comment PS: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF JENNIFER HICKS ON BEHALF OF HERSELF SERVED ON STEVE DESEDARE WITH SERVICE DATE OF 01/11/13.

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE (4) Comment PS: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF JENNIFER HICKS ON BEHALF OF HERSELF SERVED ON STEVE DESEDARE WITH SERVICE DATE OF 01/11/13.

Fee Waiver Granted.

ORDER - FEE WAIVER Comment OWFG: ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF FEES FILED BY JENNIFER HICKS ONBEHALF OF HERSELF GRANTEDIN THE AMOUNT OF $435.00, SIGNED BY JUDGE FREEMAN ON 01/08/13.

Summons Issued / Filed.

SUMMONS Comment S30IF: 30 DAY SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED.

Request for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety.

DISMISSAL (2) Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.

Proof of Service by PERSONAL SERVICE of.

PROOF OF SERVICE (5) Comment PSN1: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF PLAINTIFF'S SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT SERVED ON TYLER M. PAETKU BY SERVING PAULA AGUILAR WITH SERVICE DATE OF 10/14/13 FILED.

Conversion Action.

NOTICE Comment PNTWO: PRINT COMBINED MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND JURY TRIAL OR COURT TRIAL NOTICE

Conversion Hearing.

CMC NOTICE Judicial Officer Dylina Steven L Comment CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Answer / Response / Denial - Unlimited.

ANSWER Comment ANS: (S) ANSWER TO COMPLAINT OF JENNIFER HICKS ON BEHALF OF HERSELF FILED BY STEVE DESEDARE, REPRESENTED BY CHARLES J. SMITH

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE Comment PSBC: PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF JENNIFER HICKS ON BEHALF OF HERSELF SERVED ON DAWG HOUSE PET SPA BY SERVING STEVE DESEDARE WITH SERVICE DATE OF 01/11/13

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE (2) Comment PSBC: PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF JENNIFER HICKS ON BEHALF OF HERSELF SERVED ON DAWG HOUSE PET SPA BY SERVING STEVE DESEDARE WITH SERVICE DATE OF 01/11/13

Civil Case Cover Sheet.

COVERSHEET Comment CCS: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED

Complaint.

COMPLAINT Comment COM: (S) COMPLAINT FILED

6 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/18/2013
  • Disposition: Judgment; Judgment Type; Dispositioned; Party; Name: DAWG HOUSE PET BATHING A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: DAWG HOUSE PET SPA A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: DESEDARE STEVE; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: ON BEHALF OFALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED AND ON BEHALF OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS PRIVATE ATTY GENERAL; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: JENNIFER HICKS, ONBEHALF OF HERSELF; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2017
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment NOH: NOTICE OF HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2017
  • Conversion Hearing. Additional Info: Comment OSC RE: DISMISSAL HEARING AS TO DISMISSAL AFTER SETTLEMENT AT VOLUNTARY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2017
  • Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal. Additional Info: Hearing Time 9:00 AM Cancel Reason Vacated Comment Dept: TBA OSC RE: DISMISSAL HEARING AS TO DISMISSAL AFTER SETTLEMENT AT VOLUNTARY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/16/2015
  • View Court Documents
  • Request for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety. Additional Info: DISMISSAL (2) Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2014
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment HV: HEARING VACATED. REASON: MATTER SETTLED 10/18/13

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2014
  • Conversion Hearing. Additional Info: Comment JURY TRIAL. TIME ESTIMATE: 7 DAYS 00:00 HOURS.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2014
  • Jury Trial. Additional Info: Hearing Time 9:00 AM Cancel Reason Vacated Comment Dept: PJ JURY TRIAL. TIME ESTIMATE: 7 DAYS 00:00 HOURS.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2014
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment HV: HEARING VACATED. REASON: MATTER SETTLED 10/18/13

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2014
  • Conversion Hearing. Additional Info: Comment MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
57 More Docket Entries
  • 01/10/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • Fee Waiver Granted. Additional Info: ORDER - FEE WAIVER Comment OWFG: ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF FEES FILED BY JENNIFER HICKS ONBEHALF OF HERSELF GRANTEDIN THE AMOUNT OF $435.00, SIGNED BY JUDGE FREEMAN ON 01/08/13.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2013
  • Cause Of Action. Additional Info: Action Complaint File Date 01/08/2013

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2013
  • New Filed Case.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2013
  • Request to Waive Court Fees. Additional Info: Comment APWF: APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF COURT FEES AND COSTS FILED BY JENNIFER HICKS ONBEHALF OF HERSELF.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet. Additional Info: COVERSHEET Comment CCS: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • Summons Issued / Filed. Additional Info: SUMMONS Comment S30IF: 30 DAY SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • Complaint. Additional Info: COMPLAINT Comment COM: (S) COMPLAINT FILED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2013
  • Financial info for DESEDARE, STEVE : Case Payment Receipt # 201302080314 DESEDARE, STEVE $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2013
  • Financial info for DESEDARE, STEVE : Transaction Assessment $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2013
  • Financial: DESEDARE, STEVE; Total Financial Assessment $435.00; Total Payments and Credits $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

DRU ANNE KEEGAN, ESQ. (state Bar No. 157076)

KEEGAN & ASSOCIATES

Attorneys at Law

31 East Julian Street

San Jose, California 95112 F E L g B;TY Telephone: (408) 297-9986 SAN MATEO COU

Attorney for Plaintiff

JENNIFER HICKS

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Southern Branch

[Unlimited Jurisdiction]4

JENNIFER HICKS, On Behaif of Herself, On CASE NO: Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated and On Behalf of the General Public as Private Attorneys General,

COMPLAINT FOR SEXUAL BATTERY; BATTERY; SEX DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA; SEX

DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ART. I, §8;

SEX HARASSMENT IN YIOLATION OF

) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ; FEHA; VIOLATION OF RALPH ACT; ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION

OF PUBLIC POLICY; FAILURE TO PREVENT

DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT IN

VIOLATION OF FEHA; INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;

INDIVIDUAL AND REPRESENTATIVE

CLAIM VIA LAB. CODE § 2698, ET SEQ.

(“PAGA”) FOR FAILURE TO PAY WAGES BY FAILING TO PAY TIPS AND IMPROPER PAYMENT OF TIPS TO THOSE NOT

ENTITLED TO TIPS; PAGA CLAIM FOR

FAILURE TO PROVIDE ACCURATE

ITEMIZED WAGE STATEMENTS; PAGA

CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO KEEP AND MAINTAIN ACCURATE TIME RECORDS

PURSUANT TO LAB. CODE §§ 1174, 1174.5, AND 2698 ET SEQ.; CONVERSION, PAGA

CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO PAY WAITING

TIME PENALTIES IN VIOLATION OF LAB. CODE §§ 201, 202 & 203; UNFAIR COMPETITION, BREACH OF ORAL

CONTRACT STATEMENTS

STEVE DESEDARE A.K.A. STEVE DESDARE, DAWG HOUSE PET SPA, a business entity of unknown form, DAWG HOUSE PET BATHING, a business entity of unknown form, and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive,

Defendants.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff JENNIFER HICKS (“Plaintiff’), on behalf of herself, and in specific instances, on behalf of other similarly situated, and on behalf the general public as Private Attorney General (collectively “Plaintiffs”), complains of Defendants, and each of them, for the causes of action stated herein, alleged as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION:

1. Plaintiff files this action as a result of Defendants’ sexual battery, discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination and related causes of action seeking all available remedies for those causes of action.

2. Plaintiff also files an individual and representative claim on her own behalf as well as on behalf of other current and former employees of Defendants pursuant to California Labor Code § 2698 et seq., of the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA Claim”). Plaintiff brings certain claims on behalf of all current and former employees of Defendants that were employed in California within the relevant statute(s) of limitations before the date this action was filed. Those claims that are filed on behalf of Plaintiff as well as other current and former employees of Defendants are identified as such in the title of the cause of action.

3. Plaintiff has complied with the procedural requirements specified in California Labor Code§ 2699.3 as to each of the alleged violations. A true and correct copy of the notice sent via certified mail to the Defendant and California's Labor and Workforce Development Agency is attached as Exhibit “A.”

4, As a result of the violations alleged, Plaintiff, as a an aggrieved employee on behalf of herself and other current and former similarly situated employees employed by Defendants, seek all civil penalties available pursuant to Labor Code § 2699, including all civil penalties, attomey’s‘fees, expenses and costs of suit.

5. Enforcement of statutory provisions to protect workers and to ensure proper and prompt payment of wages is a fundamental public interest. Plaintiff’s successful enforcement of important rights affecting public interest will confer a significant benefit upon the general public. Private enforcement of these rights is necessary, as no public agency has pursued

enforcement. Plaintiff is incurring a financial burden in pursuing this action and it would be

enforcement. Plaintiff is incurring a financial burden in pursuing this action and it would be against the interests of justice to require the payment of attorney’s fees and costs from any recovery obtained, pursuant to, among other authorities, California Labor Code §§ 218.5, and 2699, and Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.

against the interests of justice to require the payment of attorney’s fees and costs from any recovery obtained, pursuant to, among other authorities, California Labor Code §§ 218.5, and 2699, and Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.

6. If Plaintiff succeeds in enforcing these rights affecting the public interest, then attorney’s fees may be awarded to Plaintiff and against Defendants under Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5 and other applicable laws, in part because:

A. A successful outcome will enforce important rights affecting the public interest by

requiring Defendants to comply with California’s wage and hour, and unfair business practices laws;

B. This action will result in a significant benefit to Plaintiff, former and current employees of Defendants, and the general public by bringing to a halt unlawful, unfair, deceptive, and misleading activity, and by causing the return of ill-gotten gains obtained by Defendants;

C. Unless this action is prosecuted, former and current employees of Defendants and the general public will not recover those monies, and many of Defendants' employees would not be aware they were victimized by Defendants' wrongful acts and practices;

D. Unless this action is prosecuted, Defendants will continue to mislead their employees about the true nature of their rights and remedies under the wage and hour laws; and

E. An award of attorneys' fees and costs is necessary for the prosecution of this action and will result in a benefit to Plaintiff, former and current employees of Defendants, and to the public in general by preventing Defendants from continuing to circumvent wage and hour statutes which the California legislature and courts have recognized are not merely matters of private concern between employer and employee, but are matters of public concemn, designed to provide minimum substantive guarantees to individual workers, and are essential to public welfare.

E. An award of attorneys' fees and costs is necessary for the prosecution of this action and will result in a benefit to Plaintiff, former and current employees of Defendants, and to the public in general by preventing Defendants from continuing to circumvent wage and hour statutes which the California legislature and courts have recognized are not merely matters of private concern between employer and employee, but are matters of public concemn, designed to provide minimum substantive guarantees to individual workers, and are essential to public welfare. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS:

7. Plaintiff is, and at all times herein relevant to this Complaint was, an individual residing in Santa Clara County, California.

8. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant DAWG HOUSErelevant times herein, a business entity of unknown form doing business in the State of California with its principal place of business in San Carlos, California. |

9. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant DAWG HOUSE PET BATHINGrelevant times herein, a business entity of unknown form doing business in the State of California with its principal place of business in San Carlos, California.

10. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times mentioned herein, Defendants STEVE DESEDARE, A . K.A. STEVE DESDARE (collectively “DESEDARE”) was an individual residing in San Mateo County, California, and the owner of Defendants DAWG HOUSE PET SPA and DAWG HOUSE PET BATHING (collectively “DAWG HOUSE”). |

11. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times alleged herein, each Defendant was in some manner responsible for the acts and resultant damages hereinafter alleged, that each Defendant participated in the doing of the acts alleged to have been done by the named Defendants, that each Defendant was the agent, servant, employee or affiliated entity of each of the other Defendants,. and was acting in the course and scope of said agency, employment or affiliation. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each of the Defendants sued herein gave consent to, ratified, and/or authorized the acts alleged herein to each of the remaining Defendants.

12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that there exists, and at all times mentioned herein there existed, a unity of interest and ownership between DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE, such that any individuality and separateness between DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE has ceased and DAWG HOUSE is the alter ego of DESEDARE in that at all times mentioned herein, DAWG HOUSEtwas but a shell, instrumentality and conduit through which DESEDARE carried on his

12. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that there exists, and at all times mentioned herein there existed, a unity of interest and ownership between DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE, such that any individuality and separateness between DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE has ceased and DAWG HOUSE is the alter ego of DESEDARE in that at all times mentioned herein, DAWG HOUSEtwas but a shell, instrumentality and conduit through which DESEDARE carried on his business in a corporate name, exercising complete control and dominance over DAWG HOUSE. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times material hereto:

business in a corporate name, exercising complete control and dominance over DAWG HOUSE. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times material hereto:

(A) DESEDARE dominated, influenced and controlled the business, property and affairs of DAWG HOUSE;

(B) DESEDARE intermingled the assets of DAWG HOUSE to suit the convenience of DESEDARE;

( C) DESEDARE used the assets of DAWG HOUSE for his own personalother entities under his control;

(D) DESEDARE caused assets of DAWG HOUSE to be transferred to him, or to other entities under his control, without adequate consideration;

(E) DESEDARE withdrew funds from DAWG HOUSE for his own personal use,other entities under his control.

13. Adherence to the fiction of a separate existence of DAWG HOUSE as an entity distinct from DESEDARE would permit an abuse of the corporate privilege and would sanction a fraud and promote injustice in that DESEDARE might escape liability for the causes of action set forth below and DESEDARE and his agents fraudulently represented to Plaintiff that DAWG HOUSE would abide by the terms of the agreement between Plaintiff and DAWG HOUSE and DAWG HOUSE has failed and refused, and continues to fail and refuse to abide by the terms of the agreement.

14. If the acts of DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE are treated as those of one or both of these Defendants alone, an inequitable result will follow in that either or both of these Defendants have insufficient assets to compensate Plaintiff for the injuries she has sustained, will prevent Plaintiff from being made whole, and an injustice will result.

15. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times mentioned herein, DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE were her employers under California law, that all of the Defendants herein did acts consistent with the existence of an employer-employee relationship with Plaintiff, and all of the Defendants were owned, controlled or employed, directly or indirectly, by DESEDARE.

15. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all relevant times mentioned herein, DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE were her employers under California law, that all of the Defendants herein did acts consistent with the existence of an employer-employee relationship with Plaintiff, and all of the Defendants were owned, controlled or employed, directly or indirectly, by DESEDARE. 16. Plaintiff does not know the true names or capacities, whetner individual, partners, corporate or otherwise, of the Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, and for that reason, said Defendants are sued under fictitious names and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this Complaint when the true names and capacities of each of the entities and individuals sued as DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, are ascertained.

16. Plaintiff does not know the true names or capacities, whetner individual, partners, corporate or otherwise, of the Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, and for that reason, said Defendants are sued under fictitious names and Plaintiff prays leave to amend this Complaint when the true names and capacities of each of the entities and individuals sued as DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, are ascertained.

17. This lawsuit arises out of conduct occurring in San Mateo County, Califorma. Venue is proper in the Superior Court, in and for the County of San Mateo under § 395.5 of the California Code of Civil Procedure because it is the county where the conduct herein alleged herein occurred and the alleged liability arose.

18. The Superior Court, in and for the County of San Mateo, has jurisdiction over this proceeding because the amount in controversy exceeds Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 86.

19. Defendants employed Plaintiff as a dog bather from approximately November, 2011 through May, 2012, when her employment was constructively terminated. Plaintiff’s direct and only supervisor was Defendant DESEDARE.

20. At the time of her hire, Plaintiff and Defendants entered into an employment agreement which included oral and implied-in-fact agreements.

21, The basic terms of the agreements provided that Plaintiff’s ;:mployment would be secure for as long as her performance was satisfactory, that Plaintiff would not be sexually harassed or discriminated against, that Plaintiff would not be discharged without good cause, and that Plaintiff would earn agreed-upon wages and benefits.

22. Atall times mentioned herein, Plaintiff was employed pursuant to the oral and implied agreements with Defendants and at all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff performed her duties and obligations by performing her job duties satisfactorily, and Defendants, and each of them, knew Plaintiff had fulfilled all of her duties satisfactorily.

23. Defendants, and each of them, engaged in an ongoing course of conduct against Plaintiff that was disc\n'minatory and hostile. Said conduct continued until the time Plaintiff’s employment constructively terminated because of said conduct. Plaintiff” was forced to terminate her employment

23. Defendants, and each of them, engaged in an ongoing course of conduct against Plaintiff that was disc\n'minatory and hostile. Said conduct continued until the time Plaintiff’s employment constructively terminated because of said conduct. Plaintiff” was forced to terminate her employment because the workplace had become so hostile because of the Defendants’ conduct. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to sexually discriminating and harassing conduct that was so severe, widespread and persistent that a reasonable woman would have considered her work environment to be abusive. Plaintiff’s resignation of her employment was in effect a constructive termination of her employment by the Defendants. Said conduct has taken place within the applicable statute(s) of limitations. Said conduct was targeted at Plaintiff because of her sex and gender.

because the workplace had become so hostile because of the Defendants’ conduct. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to sexually discriminating and harassing conduct that was so severe, widespread and persistent that a reasonable woman would have considered her work environment to be abusive. Plaintiff’s resignation of her employment was in effect a constructive termination of her employment by the Defendants. Said conduct has taken place within the applicable statute(s) of limitations. Said conduct was targeted at Plaintiff because of her sex and gender.

24. Specifically, shortly after Plaintiff’s initial hire date and continuing throughout her employment, Defendant DESEDARE engaged in repeated unwelcome sexual acts toward Plaintiff, which created an atmosphere and culture of sexual and gender bias against Plaintiff. Said conduct consisted of, but was not limited to the following :

A While grooming an English Sheepdog with Plaintiff, DESEDARE engaged in sexual acts with the dog by fingering its vagina for a considerable time while telling Plaintiff about its “pussy”;

B. DESEDARE persistently asked Plaintiff about her dating relationships, both past and present, and inquired about her sexual preferences, asking her to describe in detail what types of sexual acts turned her on. DESEDARE informed Plaintiff that his fetish was anal sex and became aroused as he described his proclivity to engage in such sexual activity as both a “receiver” and a “giver”,

C. On several occasions while Plaintiff was washing dogs, DESEDARE walked by the tub and brushed up against Plaintiff so that his penis would rub against her buttocks;

D. When trimming a dog’s nails DESEDARE would situate himself so that his crotch was close to Plaintiff’s face;

E. After a dryer fell down and hit Plaintiff on her shoulder and arm, DESEDARE lifted up her shirt and groped her sexually despite her protests;

F. DESEDARE walked in on Plaintiff while she was changing her clothes and repeatedly changed his clothes in locations and at times when he knew Plaintiff would be entering the area;

G. DESEDARE patted Plaintiff on the buttocks when she walked in front of him;

G. DESEDARE patted Plaintiff on the buttocks when she walked in front of him; 31 East Julian St., San Jose, California 95112

31 East Julian St., San Jose, California 95112

Phone: (408) 297-9986

KEEGAN & ASSOCIATES

H. DESEDARE pulled down Plaintiff’s pants to look at her buttocks;

L DESEDARE summoned Plaintiff to his computer and showed her offensive sexual content and made her read “vagina jokes,” trapping her behind the desk so she could not leave; and

J. DESEDARE described to Plaintiff his sexual fantasies concerning female clientele, and insisted that she look at their bodies when they came to the business to drop off or pick up their pets.

25. Plaintiff would not have suffered the discrimination and harassment if not for her gender and sex. Defendants had a legal duty to prevent unlawful harassment and discrimination in the workplace.

26. Plaintiff suffered a loss of inco:fle and other intangible loss of other employment-related opportunities because of Defendants' unlawful conduct in an amount according to proof.

27 Plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life and physical distress because of Defendants' unlawful conduct, resulting in her general damage in an amount in excess of $25,000.00.

28. Plaintiff has and will incur medical expense for treatment of the injuries described above in an amount according to proof.

29. Plaintiff has and will incur attorney’s fees and costs in the bringing of this action in an amount according to proof.

30. Plaintiff has filed a complaint regarding Defendants' conduct with the State of California' Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“FEHA”) and has received a written right to sue letter from said agency over said conduct. Plaintiff has filed this lawsuit within one year of the date of receipt of her right to sue letter.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Sexual Battery (Against All Defendants) Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations contained in the previous

paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 31 East Julian St., San Jose, California 95112

31 East Julian St., San Jose, California 95112

Phone: (408) 297-9986

KEEGAN & ASSOCIATES

31. In violation of Civil Code § 1708.5, Defendant DESEDAR, in the course and scope of his duties as an employee of DAWG HOUSE, and without Plaintiff’s consent, intentionally caused an offensive contact with one or more intimate parts o-f Plaintiff on several occasions. Defendant DESEDARE is personally and individually liable for his acts and Defendant DAWG HOUSE 1s vicariously liable for DESEDARE’s acts.

32. In intentionally causing an offensive contact with one or more intimate parts of Plaintiff, Defendant DESEDARE willfully carried out his despicable acts with malice, fraud and oppression, and with callous disregard for Plaintiff’s rights, sensibilities and well-being. Defendant DESEDARE was a managing agent of Defendant DAWG HOUSE. Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against both Defendants DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE .

33. As a direct and proximate result of DESEDARE’s sexual battery, Plaintiff has been damaged as herein described in an amount to be established at trial, but exceeding the minimum jurisdictional amount of this Court.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Battery (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations contained in the previous paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

34. Defendant DESEDARE, in the course and scope of his duties as a managerial employee of DAWG HOUSE, and without Plaintiff’s consent, intentionally caused an offensive contact with Plaintiff several occasions. Defendant DESEDARE is personally and individually liable for his acts and Defendant DAWG HOUSE is vicariously liable for DESEDARE's acts.

35. Inintentionally causing an offensive contact with Plaintiff, Defendant DESEDARE willfully carried out his despicable acts with malice, fraud and oppression, and with callous disregard for Plaintiff's rights, sensibilities and well-being. Defendant DESEDARE was a managing agent of Defendant DAWG HOUSE. thus, Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against both Defendants DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE.

35. Inintentionally causing an offensive contact with Plaintiff, Defendant DESEDARE willfully carried out his despicable acts with malice, fraud and oppression, and with callous disregard for Plaintiff's rights, sensibilities and well-being. Defendant DESEDARE was a managing agent of Defendant DAWG HOUSE. thus, Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against both Defendants DAWG HOUSE and DESEDARE. 31 East Julian St., San Jose, California 95112

31 East Julian St., San Jose, California 95112

Phone: (408) 297-9986

KEEGAN & ASSOCIATES

36. As a direct and proximate result of DESEDARE's battery, Plaintiff has been damaged as herein described in an amount to be established at trial, but exceeding the minimum jurisdictional amount of this Court.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Sex Discrimination in Violation of FEHA (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations contained in the previous paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. |

37. Defendants' sex and gender discrimination was a violation of California Government Code § 12940.

38. Plaintiff has been damaged as alleged above as a legal result of Defendants' unlawful sex and gender discrimination.

39. The above-alleged actions of Defendants were done with malice, fraud or oppression, and in reckless disregard of Plaintiff's rights under FEHA, California Civil Code § 3294 and in violation of the public policy of California. Specifically Defendants harassed Plaintiff because of her sex and gender, thereby entitling Plaintiff to exemplary or punitive damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Sex Discrimination in Violation of the California Constitution, Art. I, §8 (Against all Defendants)

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations contained in the previous paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

40. Defendants subjected Plaintiff to hostile work environment sexual harassment.

4]1. Defendant DESEDARE’s comments and actions were unwelcome, and so severe or pervasive as to alter fundamentally the nature of Plaintiff’s work environment.

42. As alegal and proximate result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiff has suffered special and general damages in an amount to be proven.