SUM-100

 

SECOND AMENDED SUMMONS 316327.57
(CITA CION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: American Building Maintenance fanitoriai Services, inc,
(AVISO AL DEMANDADO):

a corporation, aka. Abin Janitorial Services, Inc.; American Building Maintenance, Inc., a
corporation, a.k.a Jeremias Rivera, an Individual; Rene Quintanar, an Individual; and
DGES through 100, inciusive.
YOU BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: EVELIA DAVILA, an Individual;
(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE):

 

 

You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information
beiow.

You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to ?le a written response at this court and have a copy
served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legai form if you want the court to hear your
case. There may be a court form that you can Use for your response. You can find these court forms and more information at the California Courts
Online Self-Help Center your county law iibrary, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the ?iing fee, ask
the court clerk for a fee waiver form. if you do not file your response on time, you may lose the caseby defauit, and your wages, money, and property
may be taken without further waming from the court. 7

There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney
referral service. if you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonpro?t legal services program. You can locate
these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (wwaawheipcaiifomia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center
or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory iien for waived fees and
costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court?s lien must be paid before the court wiil dismiss the case.
VISOI to ban demandado. Si no responds dentro de 30 dies, to code pueds decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lee is informacion a
continuacion.

Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO despu?s de que le entreguen esta citacidn papeles legales para presenter una respuesta por escn'to en esta
certs hacer ?que se entregue one copier a! demandanis. Una carts 0 one iiamada teiefonice no lo protegen. Sn respuesta per escdto tiene que ester
an formato legal oorrecto si desea due procesen so case en is code. Es posinie due hays an fcnnuiario que usted pueda user para su respuesta.
Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte ym?s informacion en a! Centre de A yuda do Cortes de Caiifornia en la
bibliofeca de [eyes de su condado 0 en la confe due is quede mas cerca. Si no puede pager la cuota de presentacldn, pida ai secretario de la corte
due is do un fonnulan?o do exencion do pogo do cuotas. -Si no presents su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumpiimiento yla cartels
podra quitar su sueido, dinero bienes sin mas adVertencia.

Hay orros requisites iegaies. Es recomendabie due items a an renegade inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puods iiamar a un servicio de
remisidn a abogados. Si no puede pager a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con ios requisitos para obtener servicios legafes gratuitos de un
programs do servicios Iegales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar ostos grupos sin ?nes de iucro en el sitio web do California Legal Services,
(wwaawhelpcaliforniaorg), on of Centre de Ayuda do ias Cortes do California, poni?ndose en contacto con la corte e]
colegr'o do abogados locales. AVISO: Por lay, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar ias cuotas [es costos exentos per imponer un gravamen score
cuaiquier recuperacion do $10,000 6 mas de vaicr recibida mediante un acuerdo 0 one accession dc arbitraje en on case do derecho civii. Tiene qua
pager ei gravamen de la corte antes de que la corte pueda desechar of case.

 

 

 

 

The name and address of the court is: crass NUMBER: 1
(El hombre direccion de la corte es): . 
Stanley Mosk Courthouse - Central DEV.

 

111 North Hill St, Los Angeles, CA 900l2 
The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff?s attorney, orplaintiff without an attorney, is:
(El hombre, {a direccion e! numero de tei?fono dei abogado del demandante, 0 def demandante due no tiene abogado, es);

EBBY S. BAKHTIAR, ESQ. Livingston - Bakhtiar 3435 Wilshire Blvd, Ste. 770, Los Angeles, CA 90010 - 213?632-1550

DATE: Cierk, by . Deputy
(Fecha) (Secretarfo) (Adiunto)
(For proof of service of this summons, use Proof of Service of Summons (form 

(Para prueba de entrega de esta citatidn use a! formulario Proof of Service of Summons, 

NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served

 

 

 

 

 

as an individuet defendant.
2. as the person sued under the ?ctitious name of (speci?x):
3, on behalf of (speci?l):
under: l: con 416.10 (corporation)  cc;D 416.60 (minor)
GOP 416.20 (defunct corporation) GOP 416.70 {conservatee)
GOP 416.40 (association or partnership) CCP 416.90 (authorized person)
E: other (specify):
4. by personal delivery on (date):
Prue 1 on
Form {adopted for Mandatory/[Use  Code of Civil Procedure ??412.20, 465
Judlclai Councrl of California 

[Rev July 1, 2009)

 


ATTORNEY 0R PARTY ATTORNEY Hams, State Bar number, and address): son courar use our
S. BAKHTIAR, BN1 215032)
Livingston - Bakhtiar 
3435 Wilshirc Boulevard Suite 770
Los Angolcs, California 9001.0
TELEPHONE no: 2% 3) 632? 1550 FAX no: (213) 632?3 100
ATTORNEY roR (Name): laintiffs
SUPERIOR COURT OF COUNTY OF Los Angeics
STREET ADDRESS: 1 1 1 North Hill St,
ADDRESS:
CITY AND er CODE: Los Angolcs, CA 90012
BRANCH Stanley Mosk Courthouse Central Div.
CASE. NAME:

Davila, cl: at. v. ABM, ct at.

 

 

 

 

CNIL CASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation CASE NUMBER:
Unlimited Limited BC482422
{Amour}? (Amount C1 Counter Jomder an h? 1
demanded demanded is Filed with ?rst appearance by defendant JUDGE: on? (ma 0 Iglzm
exceeds $25,000) $25,000 or loss) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT: 4i

 

 

 

items 1?6 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2).

1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:

Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation
Auto (22) Breach of contract/warranty (05) (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400m3.403)
Uninsured motorist (46) [3 Rule 3.740 collections (09)

Other PIIPDIWD (Personal Other collections (09)

 

Antitrust/Trade regulation (03)
Construction defect (10)
Mass tort (40)

Securities litigation (28)
Environmentalf?toxic tort (30)

DamageliNrongful Death} Tort

Asbestos (04) 1
Product liability (24)

insurance coverage (18)

Other contract 
Real Property



Medical mammdm (45) Emmem (twain/Inverse insurance coverage claims arising from the
Other (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case
(Other) Tort :1 Wrongful eviction (33) types (41)
Business tort/unfair business practice (07) Other real prepeny (26) Enforcement Of JUdgment
Civil rights (08) Unlawful Datainor :1 Enforcement of judgment (20)
Defamation (13) Commemlal (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
Fraud (18) Residential (32) Rico 
intellectual property {19) l: Drugs (38) Other complaint {not specified above) (42)
:1 PrOfESSionag negligence <25} Ju?ik??ai ReView Miscellaneous Civil Petition
Other ?00 (35) :1 Asset {O?e?mm (05} 9artnorsh'ro and corporate governance (21}
Employment Petition re: arbitration award (1 1)

Other petition (not speci?ed above) (43)
Wrongful termination (36)

Writ ofmandate (02)
[j Otheromployment (15)

Othorjudicial review (39)
2. This case is is not complex under rule 3.400 oithe California Rules of Court. 1
factors requiring exceptional judicial management:
a. Largo number of separately represented parties d. Largo number ofwitnesses
b. Extensive motion practice raising dif?cult or novel
issues that will be time?consuming to resolve
c. :1 Substantial amount of documentary evidence

 

 

 

tthe case is complex, mark the

c. Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts
in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court
f. Substantial costjudgment judicial supervision

 

 

3. Remedies sought (check all thatapply}: a. monetary brill nonmonetarv; declaratory or inlunctivc relief C. punitive
4. Number of causes of action (specify): 13 (Thirteen)
5. This case i: is is not a class action suit.
6. If there are any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. .ri?ou may use form 5.)
Date: Jul 30 2012  ?Wm,  
EBBY ESQ. a 

(TYPE on PRINT NAME)

 

 

(SIGNATURE or PARTY cannonnsv FOR mam
NOTICE ?gs-r?
- Plaintiff must ?le this cover sheet with the ?rst paper ?led in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases ?led

under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and institutions Code). (Cat. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to ?le may result
in sanctions.

File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet reached by iocai court ruia.
lfthis case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq, of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all
other parties to the action or proceeding.

.0 Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes onl

 

 

 

 

gage 1 or 2

Form Adapted for Mandatory Use Cal. Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220, 3400?3403, 3,740;

Judicial Council of California CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Cal. Standards of Judicial Administration, std. 3?10
[Rev July 1, 2007}

ca. gov

 

 

SHORT TITLE:

Davila, et al. v. ABM, et al.

CASE NUMBER

[30482422

 

 

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND
STATEMENT OF LOCATION
(CERTIFICATE OF GROUNDS FOR ASSIGNMENT TO COURTHOUSE LOCATION)

 

 

This form is required pursuant to Local Rule 2.0 in all new civil case filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

 

Item i. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected for this case:

JURY YES CLASS YES LIMITED EIYES TIME ESTIMATED FORTRIAL

El 1Z1 DAYS

Item II. Indicate the correct district and courthouse location (4 steps If you checked ?Limited Case?, skip to Item Ill, Pg. 4):

Step 1: After first compieting the Civil Case Cover Sheet form, ?nd the main Civil Case Cover Sheet heading for your
case in the left margin below, and, to the right in Column A, the Civil Case Cover Sheet case type you selected.

Step 2: Check Superior Court type of action in Column below which best describes the nature of this case.

Step 3: In Column C, circle the reason for the court location choice that applies to the type of action you have
checked. For any exception to the court location, see Local Rule 2.0.

 

 

Applicabte Reasons for Choosing Courthouse Location (see Coiumn below)

 

 

. Location where cause of action arose.



. Class actions must be ?led in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, central district.
. May be ?led in central (other county, or no bodily injury/property damage).

. Location where bodily injury, death or dama occurred.
. Location where performance required or de endant reeldes.

Location of property or permanently garaged vehicle.
Location where petitioner resides.

Location wherein defendant/res ondent functions wholiy.
Location where one or more of he arties reside.

6.
7.
S.
10: Location of Labor CommissionerO ice

Step 4: Fill in the information requested on page 4 in Item Itl; complete Item IV. Sign the declarationCivil Case Cover Sheet  33' Type ofAction App-Iicabie Reasons ..
Category No. i (Check only one) See Step 3 Above-
0 Auto (22) A7100 Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 1., 2., 4.
r:
Uninsured Motortst (48) E3 A7110 Personat Ing'uryz?Propetty DamagefWrongfui Death Uninsured Motorist 1., 2., 4.
A6070 Asbestos Property Damage 2.
Asbestos (04)
>5 [3 A7221 Asbestos? Personat Qeath 2.
1: *1
an 
3 2 Product Liability (24) A7260 Product Liability (not asbestos or toxic/environmental) 8.

A7210 Medical Malpractice - Physicians Surgeons 1., 4.
. 3 
EH u? Medical Malpractice (45) I 
3 E7 El A7240 Other Professmnal Health Care Malpractice 1., 4.

i A7250 Premises Liability slip and fail) 1 4
Other 
- [21 A7230 Intentional Damage/Wrongful Death 
ersona njury a. 1., 4.
Pfopeny Qamage assau ,van atsm,ec.) 1 3
Wmn?gfeath A7270 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 
El A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property DamageA/Vrongful Death 1" 4'
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0

LASC Approved 03-04

AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Page 1 of 4

 

 

 

 

 

SHORT TITLE:

CASE NUMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Davila, et al. v. ABM, et at. BC482422
Civit Case Cover Sheet Type of Action 3 :Applicabie Reasons -
Category No. (Check only one) Bee Step 3 Above
Business Tort (07) A6029 Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraudlbreach of contract) 1., 3.
a 
a; Civil Rights (08) A6005 Civil Rights/Discrimination 1., 2., 3

8
EC: Defamation (13) E3 A6010 Defamation (slanderilibelFraud (16) 12] A6013 Fraud (no contractA6017 Legal Malpractice a, 2., 3.
Q, 3? Professional Negligence (25)
El A6050 Other Professional Malpractice (not medical or legal) 1., 2., 3.
2 
Other (35) [21 A6025 Other Noanersonai injury/Property Damage tort 2.3.
Wrongful Termination (36) A6037 Wrongful Termination 1., 2., 3
E.
.2 l2] A6024 Other Employment Complaint Case 1., 2., 3
3' Other Emptoyment (15) 
El A6109 Labor Commissioner Appeals 10.
El A6004 Breach of Rental/Lease Contract (not uniawful detainer orwrongful 2 5
eviction) 
Breach of Contract/ Warrant
(06) El A6008 Contract/Warranty Breach -Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence) 2? 5?
("0t insurance) El A6019 Negligent Breach of Contractharranty (no fraud) 1" 5'
El A6028 Other Breach of Contrathiarrahty (not frade or negiigence) 1" 2" 5?
El A6002 Collections Case-Seller Plaintiff 2., 5., 6.
*5 Collections (09)
8 El A6012 Other Promissory NotelCollecttons Case 2., 5.
Insurance Coverage (18) 12! A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex) 1., 2., 5., 8.
A6009 Contractual Fraud 1., 2., 3., 5.
Other Contract E3 A6031 Tortious Interference 5.
E3 A6027 Other Contract Dispute(not 1., 2., 3., 8.
Eminent Domateilhverse . . .
Condemnation (14) ?3 A7300 Eminent Domain/Condemnation Number of parcels 2.

a Wrongful Eviction (33) El A6023 Wrongful Eviction Case 2., 6.

El A6018 Mortgage Foreclosure 2., 6.
CD
C35 Other Real Property (26) A6032 Quiet Title 2., 6.
El A6060 Other Real Property (not eminent domain, iandiordr?tenant, foreclosure) 2., 6.
unlanUI Datig?r'commem'al El A6021 Unlawfu! Detainer-Commercial (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2., 6,
OJ
E:
uniawms Detf?gir'ReSidemai 13 A6020 Unlawfut Detaieer-Residential (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2., 6.
Es Unlawful Detainer?
Posthoredosure (34) A6020F Unlawful Detainer-Post?Foreclosure 2., 6.
:3
Uniawfui Detainer?Drugs (38) [3 A6022 Unlawful Detainer?Drugs 2., 6
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Ruie 2.0

LASC Approved 03-04

AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Page 2 of 4

 

 

 

SHORT TITLE:

CASE NUMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Davila, et al. v. ABM, et al. BC482422
Civil Case Cover Sheet Type of Action Applicable Reason-s 
?SiCategery No. - {Check only one) See Step 3 Above
Asset Forfeiture (05) A6108 Asset Forfeiture Case 2., 6.
0% Petition re Arbitration (11) [Zl A6115 Petition to Compel/Con?rm/Vacate Arbitration 2., 5
'8
A6151 Writ?Administrative Mandamus 2., 8.
?6
Writ of Mandate (02) A6152 Writ - Mandamus on Limited Court Case Matter 2.
a A6153 Writ - Othef Limited Cowt Case Review 2.
Other Judicial Review (39) A6150 Other Writ /Judicial Review 2., 8.
Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03) A6003 Antitrust/Trade Regulation 1., 2., 8
*3
 Consttuction Defect (10) Ci Construction Defect t, 2., 3

. .
Cla'ms Mass Tort A6006 Claims Involving Mass Tort 1., 2., 8
8
:1 Securities Litigation (28) [ill A6035 Securities Litigation Case 1Environmental (30) El A6036 Tox1cTortlEnVIronmentai 1., 2., 3., 8.


Insurance Coverage Claims .
e.
from Complex Case (41) A8014 Insurance Covesagel?Subrogatlon (complex case only) 1., 2., 5., 8.
A6141 Sister State Judgment 2., 9.
1g 15 A6160 Abstract of Judgment 2., 6.
E1 Enforcement A6107 Confession ofJudgment (non-domestic relations) 2., 9.
?5 GfJUdgmem (29) A6140 Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxesA6114 Petition/Certificate for Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Tax 2., 8.
A6112 Otnet Enforcement ef?udgment Case 8., 9.
RICO (27) A6033 Racketeering (RICO) Case 1., 2., 8
8 
LEE El A6030 Declaratory Relief Only 1.. 2., a.
(U
8 Other Complaints A6040 Injunctive Relief Only (not domestic/harassment) 2., 8.
(NOtSpeC?t'Ed Above) (42) El A6011 Other Commercial Complaint Case (non?tortlnon?complex) 1., 2., 8.
A6000 Other Civil Complaint (nonvtort/non-complex) 1., 2., 8.
Partnersmp corporation A6113 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case 2., 8,
Governance (21)
Ci A6121 Civil Harassment 2., 3W 9.
(I)
'3 El A6123 Workplace Harassment 2., 3., 0.
r3 A6124 EIderIDependent Adult Abuse Case 2., 3., 0.
a c. Other Petltlons
a (Not Speci?ed Above) [1 A6190 Election Contest 2.
43
0 Cl A6110 Petition for Change of Name 2.. 7.
A6170 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law 2., 3., 4., 8.
CI A6100 Other Civil Petition 2., 9.
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0

LASC Approved 03?04

AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Page 3 of 4

 

 

 

SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER

Daviia, et al. v. ABM, et al. 

 

 

 

Item Ill. Statement of Location: Enterthe address of the accident, party?s residence or place of business, performance, or other
circumstance indicated in Item Step 3 on Page 1, as the proper reason for ?ling in the court location you selected.

 

ADDRESS:
REASON: Check the appropriate boxes for the numbers shown 5200 3' Eastern Ave
under Column for the type of action that you have selected for
this case.

?31. {932. E33. E34. {35. {38. I37. 58. [39. GED.

 

 

CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:

Los Angetes CA 90040

 

 

 

 

 

item IV. Deci?aration of Assignment: i declare under pena?ty of perjury under the laws of the State of Catifornia that the foregoing is true

and correct and that the above-entitled matter is property ?led for assignment to the Stamey MOSK courthouse in the
Central

 

    

District of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angel? [Codi Civ. Proc., 392 et seq., and Local

Rule 2.0, subds. and 4


    

i

Dated:  30! 2012 .  If}?

W,
7  

PLEASE HAVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS COMPLETED AND READY TO BE FILED IN ORDER TO PROPERLY
COMMENCE YOUR NEW COURT CASE:

 

1. Original Complaint or Petition.

2. if ?ling a Complaint, a completed Summons form for issuance by the Clerk.

3. Civil Case Cover Sheet, Judicial Council form 

4. Civil Case Cover Sheet Addendum and Statement of Location form, 109, LASC Approved 03-04 (Rev.
03/11). 

5. Payment in full of the fee, unless fees have been waived.

6. A signed order appointing the Guardian ad Litem, Judicial Council form if the ptaintiff or petitioner is a
minor under 18 years of age will be required by Court in order to issue a summons.

7. Additionai copies of documents to be conformed by the Clerk. Copies of the cover sheet and this addendum
must be served aiong with the summons and complaint, or other initiating pleading in the case.

 

LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0
LASC Approved (33-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 4 of 4



1

CARNEY SHEGERIAN, ESQ. (SBN: 150461)

2

225 ARIZONA AVENUE, SUITE 400
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90401
TEL: (310) 860-0770 FAX: (310) 260-0771

3
4

Shegerian & Associates

6

EBBY S. BAKHTIAR, ESQ. (SBN: 215032)
Livingston • Bakhtiar
3435 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 770
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90010
TEL: (213) 632-1550 FAX: (213) 632-3100

7

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

5

8

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

9

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT

10

CASE No.: BC482422

11
12

EVELIA DAVILA, an Individual;
ELIZABETH MARCOS, an Individual;
ANGELICA AGUILAR, an Individual,

13

PLAINTIFFS,

14

v.

15

AMERICAN BUILDING MAINTENANCE
JANITORIAL SERVICES, INC., a
corporation, a.k.a. ABM JANITORIAL
SERVICES, INC.; AMERICAN BUILDING
MAINTENANCE, INC., a corporation, a.k.a
ABM; JEREMIAS RIVERA, an Individual;
RENE QUINTANAR, an Individual; and
DOES 1 through 100, Inclusive,

16
17
18
19
20

DEFENDANTS.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

21

1. SEXUAL HARASSMENT
2. SEXUAL ASSAULT AND BATTERY
3. HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT
4. CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
5. DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEX/GENDER
6. FAILURE TO ENGAGE IN A TIMELY GOOD
FAITH INTERACTIVE PROCESS & TO
ACCOMMODATE
7. DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY
8. DISCRIMINATION BASED ON AGE
9. FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION
AND HARASSMENT

22

10. RETALIATION

23

11. WRONGFUL AND TORTIOUS DISCHARGE

24
25

12. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

26

13. UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

27

L•B
LAW

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

28

DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY
The above-named Plaintiffs hereby complain and allege as follows:
1.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

PLAINTIFFS
1.

At all relevant times mentioned herein, Plaintiff EVELIA DAVILA (hereinafter

“DAVILA”), was and is an individual, residing in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
2.

At all relevant times mentioned herein, Plaintiff ELIZABETH MARCOS (hereinafter

“MARCOS”), was and is an individual, residing in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
3

At all relevant times mentioned herein, Plaintiff ANGELICA AGUILAR (hereinafter

“AGUILAR”), was and is an individual, residing in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
4.

The term “PLAINTIFFS” shall refer to DAVILA, MARCOS and AGUILAR collectively.

9
10

5.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times

11

mentioned herein, defendants AMERICAN BUILDING MAINTENANCE JANITORIAL

12

SERVICES, INC., also known as ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES, INC., AMERICAN BUILDING

13

MAINTENANCE, INC., and ABM, inclusive of DOES 1 to 50 (collectively referred to herein as

14

“ABM”), were and are corporations conducting business in the County of Los Angeles.

15

PLAINTIFFS are also informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times mentioned

16

herein, ABM regularly employed five or more persons and were the employers or co-employers of

17

PLAINTIFFS.

18

6.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times

19

mentioned herein, JEREMIAS RIVERA inclusive of DOES 51 to 75 (collectively referred to herein

20

as “RIVERA”) was and is an individual with his primary residence located in the County of Los

21

Angeles, State of California and an employee of ABM.

22

7.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times

23

mentioned herein, RENE QUINTANAR inclusive of DOES 76 to 100 (collectively referred to herein

24

as “QUINTANAR”) was and is an individual with his primary residence located in the County of

25

Los Angeles, State of California and a managing agent and/or supervisory employee of ABM.

26

L•B
LAW

DEFENDANTS

8.

Whenever in this Complaint reference is made to “DEFENDANTS” such allegation shall

27

refer to the acts or omissions of defendants ABM, RIVERA, and QUINTANAR, inclusive of DOE

28

Defendants 1 to 100, acting individually, jointly and/or severally.
2.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of

2

the defendants named herein as DOES 1 to 100, are unknown to PLAINTIFFS at this time and

3

therefore said defendants are being sued by such fictitious names. PLAINTIFFS will seek leave to

4

amend this Complaint to insert the true names and capacities of said defendants when the same

5

becomes known to PLAINTIFFS.

6

10.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times

7

mentioned herein, DOES 1 to 100, were residents of, or principally doing business in the State of

8

California and County of Los Angeles. PLAINTIFFS are further informed and believe and thereon

9

allege that each DOE herein is legally responsible in some manner or means for the events and

10

happenings referred to herein and proximately caused damage to PLAINTIFFS, either through their

11

own conduct or the conduct of their agents, servants, or employees, or due to their ownership

12

supervision and/or management of the employees, agents, entities and/or instrumentalities that

13

caused said damages, or in some other manner or means that is presently unknown to PLAINTIFFS.

14

L•B
LAW

9.

11.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all times mentioned

15

herein, there existed a unity of interest and ownership between the specifically named defendants

16

herein and DOES 1 to 100, such that any individuality and separateness between all said Defendants

17

ceased to exist. PLAINTIFFS are therefore informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all

18

relevant times herein mentioned, each defendant, whether a DOE or specifically named, was the

19

agent and employee of its co-defendants ABM, RIVERA, and/or QUINTANAR and in doing the

20

things hereinafter alleged, was acting within the authority, purpose, course and scope of such agency

21

and employment with advanced knowledge, consent and ratification of each defendant and/or co-

22

defendant ABM, RIVERA, and/or QUINTANAR. By the same token, PLAINTIFFS are informed

23

and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times mentioned herein, the specifically named

24

defendants herein and DOES 1 to 100, were also the successors-in-interest and/or alter egos of the

25

other defendants, in that they purchased, controlled, dominated and operated each other without any

26

separate identity, observation of formalities, or other manner of division. PLAINTIFFS allege that

27

to continue maintaining the facade of a separateness and individual existence between the

28

specifically named defendants and DOES, does not and will not satisfy justice.
3.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

OVERVIEW OF PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS

2

12.

3

punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant to Code of Civ. Pro.

4

§3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Govt. Code §12965(b), Code of Civ. Pro.

5

§1021.5 and Civil Code §§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from sexual harassment and hostile work

6

environment in violation of Govt. Code §12940(j)(1); sexual assault and battery under the doctrine

7

of respondent superior pursuant to Mary M. v. City of Los Angeles (1991) 54 Cal.3d 202, 209, Lisa

8

M. v. Henry Mayo (1995) 12 Cal.4th 291, 296, Herrick v. Quality Hotels (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1608,

9

1618 and Hart v. Nat. Mortg. & Land Co. (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 1420, 1432; discrimination based

10

on sex/gender and disabilities in violation of Govt. Code §12940(a) and (c), as well as 2 Code of

11

Regs. §7286.3; civil rights violations through intimidation, coercion and/or violence or the threat

12

thereof, pursuant to Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1 and 52(b); failure to engage in a timely, good faith

13

interactive process and failure to accommodate despite knowing or having reason to know of

14

MARCOS’ disabilities, in violation of Govt. Code §12940(n) and (m); failure to prevent harassment

15

and discrimination that ABM knew, or had reason to know about, in violation of Govt. Code §§

16

12940(k) and 12940(j)(1); retaliation in violation of Govt. Code §12940(h) and Labor Code §1102.5

17

and wrongful and retaliatory discharge, in violation of public policy and as codified by Govt. Code

18

§§ 12940(h) and 12920, for filing a Complaint against ABM and/or pursuing her legal rights and/or

19

ABM’S perception that MARCOS was opposing its illegal employment practices, and also because

20

of her known and/or perceived disabilities and need for accommodations; intentional infliction of

21

emotional distress; and violation of Bus. & Prof. Code §17200, et seq.

22

L•B
LAW

MARCOS brings this action against ABM for economic, non-economic, compensatory and

13.

MARCOS brings this action against RIVERA for economic, non-economic, compensatory

23

and punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant to Code of Civ.

24

Pro. §3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Govt. Code §12965(b) and Civil Code

25

§§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from RIVERA’S sexual harassment; rape as well as sexual assault

26

and battery; denial of MARCOS’ civil rights in violation of Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1 and 52(b);

27

and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

28

///
4.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

14.

2

compensatory and punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant

3

to Code of Civ. Pro. §3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Gov. Code §12965(b),

4

Code of Civ. Pro. §1021.5 and Civil Code §§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from sexual harassment

5

and hostile work environment in violation of Govt. Code §12940(j)(1); sexual assault and battery

6

under the doctrine of respondent superior pursuant to Mary M., 54 Cal.3d at 209, Lisa M., 12 Cal.4th

7

at 296, Herrick, 19 Cal.App.4th at 1618 and Hart, 189 Cal.App.3d at 1432; discrimination based on

8

sex/gender, disabilities and age in violation of Govt. Code §12940(a) and (c), as well as 2 Code of

9

Regs. §§ 7286.3, 7295.0 and 7295.2; civil rights violations through intimidation, coercion and/or

10

violence or the threat thereof, pursuant to Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1 and 52(b); failure to engage

11

in a timely, good faith interactive process and failure to accommodate despite knowing or having

12

reason to know of DAVILA’s disabilities, in violation of Govt. Code §12940(n) and (m); failure to

13

prevent harassment and discrimination that ABM knew, or had reason to know about, in violation

14

of Govt. Code §§ 12940(k) and 12940(j)(1); retaliation in violation of Govt. Code §12940(h) and

15

Labor Code §1102.5 and wrongful and retaliatory discharge in violation of public policy and as

16

codified by Govt. Code §§ 12940(h) and 12920, for filing a criminal complaint against and/or

17

pursuing her legal rights and/or ABM’S perception that DAVILA was opposing its illegal

18

employment practices and also because of her known and/or perceived disabilities and need for

19

accommodations for making known her intention to file a workers’ compensation claim and age;

20

intentional infliction of emotional distress; and violation of Bus. & Prof. Code §17200, et seq.

21

L•B
LAW

DAVILA brings this action against defendants ABM for economic, non-economic,

15.

DAVILA brings this action against defendant RIVERA for economic, non-economic,

22

compensatory and punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant

23

to Code of Civ. Pro. §3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Govt. Code §12965(b)

24

and Civil Code §§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from RIVERA’S sexual harassment; attempted

25

rape, as well as sexual assault and battery; denial of DAVILA’S civil rights in violation of Civil

26

Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1 and 52(b); and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

27

///

28

///
5.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

DAVILA brings this action against QUINTANAR for economic, non-economic,

2

compensatory and punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant

3

to Code of Civ Pro. §3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Gov. Code §12965(b)

4

and Civil Code §§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from QUINTANAR’S harassment based on

5

DAVILA’S sex/gender; violation DAVILA’S civil rights pursuant to Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1

6

and 52(b); and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

7

17.

AGUILAR brings this action against defendants ABM for economic, non-economic,

8

compensatory and punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant

9

to Code of Civ. Pro. §3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Govt. Code §12965(b),

10

Code of Civ. Pro. §1021.5 and Civil Code §§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from sexual harassment

11

and hostile work environment in violation of Govt. Code §12940(j)(1); sexual assault and battery

12

under the doctrine of respondent superior pursuant to Mary M., 54 Cal.3d at 209, Lisa M., 12 Cal.4th

13

at 296, Herrick, 19 Cal.App.4th at 1618 and Hart, 189 Cal.App.3d at 1432; discrimination based on

14

sex/gender in violation of Govt. Code §12940(a) and (c), as well as 2 Code of Regs. §7286.3; civil

15

rights violations through intimidation, coercion and/or violence or the threat thereof, pursuant to

16

Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1 and 52(b); failure to prevent harassment and discrimination that ABM

17

knew, or had reason to know about, in violation of Govt. Code §§ 12940(k) and 12940(j)(1);

18

retaliation in violation of Govt. Code §12940(h) and Labor Code §1102.5 and wrongful and

19

retaliatory discharge, in violation of public policy and as codified by Govt. Code §§ 12940(h) and

20

12920, for filing a Complaint against ABM and/or pursuing her legal rights and/or ABM’S

21

perception that AGUILAR was opposing its illegal employment practices; intentional infliction of

22

emotional distress; and violation of Bus. & Prof. Code §17200, et seq.

23

L•B
LAW

16.

18.

AGUILAR brings this action against defendant RIVERA for economic, non-economic,

24

compensatory and punitive damages, pursuant to Civil Code §3294; prejudgment interest pursuant

25

to Code of Civ. Pro. §3291; costs; and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Gov. Code §12965(b)

26

and Civil Code §§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3) resulting from RIVERA’S sexual harassment; sexual assault

27

and battery; denial of AGUILAR’S civil rights in violation of Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52.1 and

28

52(b); and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
6.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1
2

PROCEDURAL ALLEGATIONS
19.

3

County of Los Angeles, State of California and the amount of damages PLAINTIFFS seek exceed

4

the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. On April 7, 2011, PLAINTIFFS filed their first

5

charge of discrimination, harassment, failure to accommodate and retaliation against ABM, RIVERA

6

and QUINTANAR with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and obtained their Right-

7

to-Sue letters on the same date; on May 31, 2012, MARCOS and AGUILAR filed additional charges

8

of discrimination and retaliation against ABM and received their Right-to-Sue letters on the same

9

day; and on July 10, 2012, MARCOS and AGUILAR filed further charges of discrimination and

10

retaliation against ABM and received their Right-to-Sue letters on the same day.

11
12

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS RELEVANT TO ALL PLAINTIFFS
20.

PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that ABM provides office

13

buildings, throughout Los Angeles County and California, with janitorial and cleaning services. Up

14

until May 2009, PLAINTIFFS worked together for ABM, during the evening hours, as members of

15

its cleaning crew in Los Angeles, California. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon

16

allege that, at all relevant times mentioned herein, they were supervised and/or managed by ABM’S

17

supervisory employee Miguel Villasana (hereinafter “VILLASANA”) and ABM’S managing

18

agent/employee Noe Trejo (hereinafter “TREJO”). At all relevant times mentioned herein,

19

PLAINTIFFS worked with, or in close proximity to, RIVERA who was also employed by ABM.

20

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS RELEVANT TO MARCOS

21

21.

Between approximately April 1997 and May 30, 2012, MARCO worked for ABM as a

22

member of its cleaning crew. During her employment, MARCOS regularly worked nights and

23

consistently performed her job duties to ABM’S complete satisfaction.

24

L•B
LAW

The unlawful acts and violations alleged herein were committed by DEFENDANTS in the

22.

MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that she began working with

25

RIVERA in approximately late 2005 and that shortly thereafter, he began sexually harassing her

26

while in the course and scope of his employment. Originally, RIVERA’S conduct entailed offensive

27

sexual verbal language of an intermittent nature that steadily escalated to daily, or near daily verbal,

28

visual and/or physical behavior of a hostile, sexual nature based solely on MARCOS’ sex/gender.
7.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

RIVERA’S conduct included, but was not limited to offensive sexual gestures, sexual

2

solicitations, sexual requests, lascivious language, sexual advances, demands for sexual compliance

3

and unwanted physical contact of a sexual nature. Notably, during each physical episode, RIVERA

4

intentionally, deliberately and unlawfully exercised physical force, threats of violence, violence

5

and/or menace to restrain, detain and confine MARCOS, compelling her to remain confined for an

6

appreciable amount of time. At no time did MARCOS ever consent to being restrained, detained

7

and/or confined by RIVERA and all relevant times mentioned herein, RIVERA’s physical conduct,

8

as herein alleged, was carried out while he was acting in the course and scope of his employment.

9

24.

During each such physical episode, as herein alleged, RIVERA also carried out and/or

10

committed several acts, each of which resulted, either directly or indirectly, in sexually offensive

11

contact with MARCOS’ person. MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that

12

RIVERA committed the aforesaid and herein described acts with the intent to cause a harmful and

13

offensive contact with the intimate parts of MARCOS’ anatomy and/or to cause MARCOS an

14

imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with RIVERA’S intimate parts, or by use

15

of RIVERA’S intimate parts. Consequently, during approximately early fall, 2009, while

16

intentionally, deliberately and unlawfully exercised physical force, threats of violence, violence

17

and/or menace to restrain, detain and confine MARCOS and compelling her to remain confined for

18

an appreciable amount of time, RIVERA violently raped MARCOS. At no time did MARCOS ever

19

consent to being raped and all relevant times mentioned herein, RIVERA’s committed the rape while

20

acting in the course and scope of his employment.

21

L•B
LAW

23.

25.

RIVERA’S conduct, as herein alleged, was, at all relevant times mentioned herein,

22

unwelcome, pervasive and severe. RIVERA’S concerted, routine, offensive pattern of sexual conduct

23

toward MARCOS was abusive, deliberate, unsolicited, directly related to her sex/gender and was

24

sufficiently severe and pervasive so as to adversely alter the condition of MARCOS’ employment.

25

MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that a reasonable woman of her age,

26

in her circumstances, would have considered the unsolicited conduct RIVERA subjected her to and

27

which she witnessed, as herein alleged, to have created a work environment that was hostile and

28

abusive. In fact, MARCOS did consider her work environment to be hostile and abusive.
8.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

26.

2

personally witnessed RIVERA harassing others co-workers, including but not limited to AGUILAR.

3

However, throughout her ordeal, and at all relevant times mentioned herein, MARCOS was unable

4

to terminate her relationship with RIVERA since they were co-workers.

5

27.

MARCOS is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM has, and at all relevant

6

times mentioned herein had, a purported no-tolerance policy against the specific type of conduct

7

RIVERA subjected her to. MARCOS is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that prior

8

to and following the rape, she and other similarly situated co-workers, including but not limited to

9

AGUILAR, lodged multiple complaints about RIVERA and his inappropriate and illegal conduct,

10

with ABM, by and through ABM’s managing agents and supervisory employees, including but not

11

limited to VILLASANA and/or TREJO. As such, MARCOS has been informed and believes and

12

thereon alleges that ABM knew, must have known, should have known and/or had reason to know

13

of the continuous and unwelcomed sexual harassment carried out by RIVERA.

14

28.

Nevertheless, RIVERA continued his unrelenting, pervasive sexual harassment. MARCOS

15

has thus been informed and believes and thereon alleges that RIVERA was neither reprimanded nor

16

were her, or any of her co-workers’ complaints against RIVERA ever investigated. MARCOS is

17

informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM failed to implement its policies and procedures

18

concerning sexual harassment because of MARCOS’ sex/gender and therefore, took no steps to

19

prevent, proscribe and/or forestall RIVERA from continuing his conduct.

20

L•B
LAW

Additionally, and while in her immediate or near work environment, MARCOS also

29.

Accordingly, MARCOS is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM failed to

21

implement measures to protect her from RIVERA or to prevent RIVERA’S illegal conduct from

22

continuing and/or escalating. In fact, MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges

23

that because of her sex/gender, ABM, by and through the acts or omissions of its managing agents

24

and supervisory employees, as herein alleged, knowingly and/or impliedly aided, incited and/or

25

conspired with RIVERA and thereby expressly and/or tacitly consented to, condoned, authorized,

26

encouraged and/or ratified RIVERA’S illegal conduct, thereby directly exposing MARCOS to the

27

intimidation, coercion, threats of violence and violence committed against her by RIVERA.

28

///
9.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

Additionally, beginning in at least 2008, MARCOS started experiencing pain and

2

limitations relating to orthopedic disabilities and injuries she developed as a result of her repetitive

3

job duties. MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that her injuries and

4

resulting disabilities, limited her from participating in at least one major life activity. MARCOS has

5

been further informed and believes and thereon alleges that following the onset of her injuries and

6

ensuing disabilities, she required reasonable accommodations in the form of light duty and/or

7

frequent rest periods during her working hours as necessary.

8

31.

MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM knew, should

9

have known, or had reason to know that she suffered from disabilities because, since 2008, she

10

informed it of same, by and through its managing and supervisory employees, including

11

VILLASANA. MARCOS, on countless occasions. MARCOS has been further informed and

12

believes and thereon alleges that the accommodations she needed were readily available and would

13

not have created an undue hardship for ABM. However, despite knowing or having reason to know

14

of MARCOS’ disabilities and need for reasonable accommodations, ABM never contacted

15

MARCOS to inquire as to what accommodations she required and/or to inform her of what

16

accommodations and/or alternative job positions were available.

17

32.

Instead, MARCOS was required to work without any aid or accommodations for her

18

disabilities despite her pain and limitations. MARCOS has therefore been informed and believes and

19

thereon alleges that because of ABM’S refusal and/or failure to accommodate her disabilities, she

20

has suffered additional injuries and/or aggravation of her underlying disabilities.

21

L•B
LAW

30.

33.

Finally, MARCOS filed her original Complaint for Damages, initiating this action, on or

22

about April 6, 2012. On or about May 2, 2012, ABM was served with MARCOS Complaint. On

23

or about May 30, 2012, MARCOS, by and through ABM’S managing agents and/or supervisory

24

employees, was told that her 15 years of employment was terminated based upon a pretext.

25

Thereafter, on or about June 22, 2012, ABM officially informed MARCOS’ that her employment

26

had been termianted. MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that the

27

termination of her employment was directly authorized by, consented to and/or ratified by ABM’s

28

managing and/or supervisory employees.
10.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

34.

MARCOS has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that the termination of her

2

employment was discriminatory, retaliatory and directly related to her pursuit of her legal rights

3

under FEHA and for filing of a Complaint against ABM with both the Department of Fair

4

Employment & Housing and the Los Angeles County Superior Court. MARCOS has been

5

additionally informed and believes and thereon alleges that the termination of her employment was

6

also discriminatorily and retaliatorily motivated by her perceived or actual disabilities, her need for

7

reasonable accommodations, her opposition to and ABM’s illegal employment practices and/or

8

ABM’S perception that she was opposing its illegal employment practices.

9

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS RELEVANT TO AGUILAR

10

35.

11

a member of its cleaning crew. During her employment, AGUILAR regularly worked nights and

12

consistently performed her job duties to ABM’S complete satisfaction.

13

36.

AGUILAR has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that she began working with

14

RIVERA in approximately late 2005 and that shortly thereafter, he began sexually harassing her.

15

Originally, RIVERA’S conduct entailed offensive sexual verbal language of an intermittent nature

16

which steadily escalated to daily, or near daily verbal, visual and/or physical behavior of a hostile,

17

sexual nature based solely on AGUILAR’S sex/gender.

18

L•B
LAW

Between approximately March 2000 and May 30, 2012, AGUILAR worked for ABM as

37.

RIVERA’S conduct included, but was not limited to offensive sexual gestures, sexual

19

solicitations, sexual requests, lascivious language, sexual advances, demands for sexual compliance

20

and unwanted physical contact of a sexual nature. Notably, during the physical episode, RIVERA

21

intentionally, deliberately and unlawfully exercised physical force, threats of violence, violence

22

and/or menace to restrain, detain and confine AGUILAR, compelling her to remain confined for an

23

appreciable amount of time. At no time did AGUILAR ever consent to being restrained, detained

24

and/or confined by RIVERA and at all relevant times mentioned herein, RIVERA’s physical

25

conduct, as herein alleged, was carried out while he was acting in the course and scope of his

26

employment.

27

///

28

///
11.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

During the physical episode, as herein alleged, RIVERA also carried out and/or committed

2

several acts, each of which resulted, either directly or indirectly, in sexually offensive contact with

3

AGUILAR’S person. AGUILAR has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that RIVERA

4

committed the aforesaid and herein described acts with the intent to cause a harmful and offensive

5

contact with the intimate parts of AGUILAR’S anatomy and/or to cause AGUILAR an imminent

6

apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with RIVERA’S intimate parts, or by use of

7

RIVERA’S intimate parts.

8

39.

RIVERA’S conduct, as herein alleged, was, at all relevant times mentioned herein,

9

unwelcome, pervasive and severe. RIVERA’S concerted, routine and offensive pattern of sexual

10

conduct toward AGUILAR was abusive, deliberate, unsolicited and directly related to her sex/gender

11

and was sufficiently severe and pervasive so as to adversely alter the condition of her employment.

12

AGUILAR has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that a reasonable woman of her age,

13

in her circumstances, would have considered the unsolicited conduct RIVERA subjected her to and

14

which she witnessed, as herein alleged, to have created a work environment that was hostile and

15

abusive. In fact, AGUILAR did consider her work environment to be hostile and abusive.

16

40.

Additionally, and while in her immediate or near work environment, AGUILAR also

17

personally witnessed RIVERA harassing others co-workers, including but not limited to MARCOS.

18

However, throughout her ordeal, and at all relevant times mentioned herein, AGUILAR was unable

19

to terminate her relationship with RIVERA since they were co-workers.

20

L•B
LAW

38.

41.

AGUILAR is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM has, and at all relevant

21

times mentioned herein had, a purported no-tolerance policy against the specific type of conduct

22

RIVERA subjected her to. AGUILAR is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that she

23

and other similarly situated co-workers, including but not limited to MARCOS, lodged multiple

24

complaints about RIVERA and his inappropriate and illegal conduct, with ABM, by and through

25

ABM’s managing agents and supervisory employees, including but not limited to VILLASANA

26

and/or TREJO. As such, AGUILAR has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM

27

knew, must have known, should have known and/or had reason to know of the continuous and

28

unwelcomed sexual harassment carried out by RIVERA.
12.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

Nevertheless, RIVERA continued his unrelenting, pervasive sexual harassment. AGUILAR

2

has thus been informed and believes and thereon alleges that RIVERA was neither reprimanded nor

3

were her, or any of her co-workers’ complaints against RIVERA ever investigated. AGUILAR is

4

informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM failed to implement its policies and procedures

5

concerning sexual harassment because of her sex/gender and therefore, took no steps to prevent,

6

proscribe and/or forestall RIVERA from continuing his conduct.

7

43.

Accordingly, AGUILAR is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM failed to

8

implement measures to protect her from RIVERA or to prevent RIVERA’S illegal conduct from

9

continuing and/or escalating. In fact, AGUILAR has been informed and believes and thereon alleges

10

that because of her sex/gender, ABM, by and through the acts or omissions of its managing agents

11

and supervisory employees, as herein alleged, knowingly and/or impliedly aided, incited and/or

12

conspired with RIVERA and thereby expressly and/or tacitly consented to, condoned, authorized,

13

encouraged and/or ratified RIVERA’S illegal conduct, thereby directly exposing AGUILAR to the

14

intimidation, coercion, threats of violence and violence committed against her by RIVERA.

15

44.

Finally, AGUILAR filed her original Complaint for Damages in this action on or about

16

April 6, 2012. On or about May 2, 2012, ABM was served with AGUILAR Complaint. On or about

17

May 30, 2012, AGUILAR, by and through ABM’S managing agents and/or supervisory employees,

18

was told that her 12 years of employment was terminated based upon a pretext. Thereafter, on or

19

about June 22, 2012, ABM officially terminated AGUILAR’S employment. AGUILAR has been

20

informed and believes and thereon alleges that the termination of her employment was directly

21

authorized by, consented to and/or ratified by ABM’s managing and/or supervisory employees.

22

L•B
LAW

42.

45.

AGUILAR has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that the termination of her

23

employment was discriminatory, retaliatory and directly related to her pursuit of her legal rights

24

under FEHA and for filing of a Complaint against ABM with both the Department of Fair

25

Employment & Housing and the Los Angeles County Superior Court. AGUILAR has been

26

additionally informed and believes and thereon alleges that the termination of her employment was

27

also discriminatorily and retaliatorily motivated by her opposition to and ABM’s illegal employment

28

practices and/or ABM’S perception that she was opposing its illegal employment practices.
13.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1
2

46.

Between June 1999 and May 2010, DAVILA, now 57 years old, worked for ABM as a

3

member of its cleaning crew. During her employment, DAVILA regularly worked nights and

4

consistently performed her job duties to ABM’S complete satisfaction.

5

47.

DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that in approximately late

6

2009, ABM assigned her to work at the same building as RIVERA. Plaintiff is informed and believes

7

and thereon alleges that in or about March 2010, RIVERA intentionally, deliberately and unlawfully

8

exercised physical force, threats of violence, violence and/or menace to restrain, detain and confine

9

DAVILA, compelling her to remain confined for an appreciable amount of time, while he physically

10

attacked her in a sexual manner. On or about April 23, 2010, again intentionally, deliberately and

11

unlawfully exercising physical force, threats of violence, violence and/or menace to restrain, detain

12

and confine DAVILA for an appreciable amount of time, RIVERA attempted to rape her.

13

48.

During the aforesaid encounters, RIVERA carried out and/or committed several acts, each

14

of which resulted, either directly or indirectly, in sexually offensive contact with DAVILA’S person.

15

RIVERA’S aforesaid acts were carried out with the intent to cause a harmful and offensive contact

16

with the intimate parts of DAVILA’S anatomy and to cause DAVILA an imminent apprehension of

17

a harmful or offensive contact with RIVERA’S intimate parts, or by use of RIVERA’S intimate

18

parts. At no time did DAVILA ever consent to being restrained, detained and/or confined by

19

RIVERA and at all relevant times mentioned herein, RIVERA’s conduct, as herein alleged, was

20

carried out while he was acting in the course and scope of his employment.

21

L•B
LAW

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS RELEVANT TO DAVILA

49.

RIVERA’S conduct, as herein alleged, was unwelcome, pervasive and severe. RIVERA’S

22

concerted, routine and offensive pattern of sexual conduct was abusive, deliberate, unsolicited and

23

directly related to DAVILA’s sex/gender and was sufficiently severe and pervasive so as to adversely

24

alter the condition of her employment. DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges

25

that a reasonable woman of her age, in her circumstances, would have considered the unsolicited

26

conduct RIVERA subjected her to and which she witnessed, as herein alleged, to have created a

27

work environment that was hostile and abusive. In fact, DAVILA did consider her work environment

28

to be hostile and abusive.
14.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

DAVILA is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM has, and at all relevant

2

times mentioned herein had, a purported no-tolerance policy against the specific type of conduct

3

RIVERA subjected her to. DAVILA is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that prior

4

to and after March 2010, her similarly situated co-workers, including but not limited to AGUILAR

5

and MARCOS, lodged multiple complaints about RIVERA and his inappropriate and illegal

6

conduct, with ABM, by and through ABM’s managing agents and supervisory employees, including

7

but not limited to VILLASANA and/or TREJO. As such, DAVILA has been informed and believes

8

and thereon alleges that ABM knew, must have known, should have known and/or had reason to

9

know of the continuous and unwelcomed sexual harassment carried out by RIVERA.

10

51.

Nevertheless, RIVERA continued his unrelenting, pervasive sexual harassment. DAVILA

11

has thus been informed and believes and thereon alleges that RIVERA was neither reprimanded nor

12

were any of her co-workers’ complaints against RIVERA ever investigated. DAVILA is informed

13

and believes and thereon alleges that ABM failed to implement its policies and procedures

14

concerning sexual harassment because of PLAINTIFFS’ sex/gender and therefore, took no steps to

15

prevent, proscribe and/or forestall RIVERA from continuing his conduct.

16

52.

Accordingly, DAVILA is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM failed to

17

implement measures to protect her from RIVERA or to prevent RIVERA’S illegal conduct from

18

continuing and/or escalating. In fact, DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges

19

that because of her sex/gender, ABM, by and through the acts or omissions of its managing agents

20

and supervisory employees, as herein alleged, knowingly and/or impliedly aided, incited and/or

21

conspired with RIVERA and thereby expressly and/or tacitly consented to, condoned, authorized,

22

encouraged and/or ratified RIVERA’S illegal conduct, thereby directly exposing DAVILA to the

23

intimidation, coercion, threats of violence and violence committed against her by RIVERA.

24

L•B
LAW

50.

53.

In fact, the attempted rape incident, when DAVILA lodged a complaint with QUINTANAR

25

and informed him of her injuries and intention to pursue criminal charges against RIVERA, he

26

responded in an extremely intimidating, coercive and threatening manner, yelling at her and accusing

27

her of enticing RIVERA, blaming her for his actions. QUINTANAR told DAVILA that “you’re the

28

kind of woman that just asks for it...and deserves what you get” or words to that affect.
15.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

QUINTANAR’s conduct was extremely offensive, coercive, threatening and intimidating

2

and DAVILA interpreted QUINTANAR statements to mean, inter alia, that she was a woman of ill

3

repute and if she pursued her legal rights, she would suffer harm, including the loss of her job.

4

Therefore, DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that QUINTANAR, by his

5

words and behavior, was attempting to dissuade her, through coercion, threats and intimidation, from

6

pursuing any criminal charges and/or her legal rights against RIVERA and/or ABM. DAVILA has

7

been additionally informed and believes and thereon alleges that QUINTANAR’S actions and

8

conduct, as herein alleged, were carried out solely based upon her sex/gender as well as her injuries

9

and the disabilities arising therefrom, both known and/or perceived.

10

55.

Additionally, during the attempted rape, DAVILA sustained serious physical disabilities

11

that limited at least one major life activity and for which she required reasonable accommodations.

12

DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM knew, should have known,

13

or had reason to know that she suffered from said disabilities because she informed it of same.

14

56.

Accordingly, DAVILA submitted doctor’s notes to ABM and requested reasonable

15

accommodations. DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that the

16

accommodations she needed were readily available and would not have created an undue hardship

17

for ABM. However, ABM demanded that DAVILA stop submitting her doctors’ notes. At no time

18

did anyone on behalf of ABM ever contact DAVILA to inquire as to what accommodations she

19

required and/or to inform her of what accommodations and/or alternative positions were available.

20

Instead, DAVILA was required to work without any accommodations for her disabilities.

21

L•B
LAW

54.

57.

During May 2010, DAVILA filed a police report, despite QUINTANAR’S threats and she

22

was terminated very soon thereafter. DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges

23

that following her termination, ABM replaced her with someone who was substantially younger.

24

DAVILA is therefore informed and believes and thereon alleges that ABM terminated her

25

employment discriminatorily and in retaliation for her complaints; for pursuing her legal rights; for

26

filing criminal charges; for ABM’S perception that she intended to file a workers’ compensation

27

claim; for her opposition to ABM’s illegal employment practices and/or ABM’S perception that she

28

was opposing its illegal employment practices; her known and/or perceived disabilities; and her age.
16.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANTS ABM AND RIVERA
AS WELL AS AGAINST QUINTANAR BY DAVILA)

2
3
4
5

58.

incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

6

59.

At all relevant times mentioned herein, PLAINTIFFS, RIVERA and QUINTANAR were

7

employed by ABM. At all relevant times mentioned herein, RIVERA subjected PLAINTIFFS to a

8

concerted, routine and repeated pattern of offensive, abusive and unwanted sexual harassment, which

9

was directly related to their sex/gender. The treatment PLAINTIFFS were subjected to, as herein

10

alleged, was sufficiently severe and pervasive so as to adversely alter the condition of their

11

employment. PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that reasonable

12

women of their age and in their circumstances, would have considered the conduct that RIVERA

13

exposed them to, as herein alleged, to have created a work environment that was hostile and abusive.

14

In fact, PLAINTIFFS did consider their work environment to be hostile and abusive.

15

60.

PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that ABM, by and

16

through its managing and supervisory employees, as herein alleged, knew, must have known, had

17

reason to know and/or should have known of RIVERA’S harassing conduct and dangerous sexual

18

propensities, yet failed to take immediate, appropriate, or adequate corrective and/or remedial

19

measures in violation of Government Code §§ 12940(k) and 12940(j)(1). In fact, ABM not only

20

failed to take steps to prevent RIVERA’S harassment and conduct, it approved, ratified, encouraged,

21

aided, incited and/or conspired with RIVERA in carrying out the subject harassment.

22

L•B
LAW

PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 57 and

61.

Therefore, as a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of RIVERA’S conduct and

23

behavior, as herein described and alleged, as well as ABM’S failure to take immediate, appropriate,

24

or adequate corrective and/or remedial measures in violation of Government Code §§ 12940(k) and

25

12940(j)(1), PLAINTIFFS suffered substantial loss of tangible job benefits, in addition to anxiety,

26

trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread, fear, worry, embarrassment, humiliation, shame, mental and

27

emotional distress and discomfort, all to their damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

28

///
17.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of RIVERA’S conduct and

2

behavior and ABM’S omissions, as herein set forth, PLAINTIFFS have also been caused to retain

3

attorneys and have thus incurred legal fees, expenses and costs, entitling them to reimbursement of

4

same pursuant to Government Code section 12965(b), in an amount to be proven at trial.

5

63.

By the same token, DAVILA, under the circumstances herein described and alleged,

6

experienced severe and pervasive harassment at the hands of QUINTANAR, a managing employee

7

of ABM, directly because of her sex/gender. QUINTANAR’s conduct, as herein set forth, was

8

carried out during the course and scope of his employment with ABM and was abusive as well as

9

extremely offensive. As a result, QUINTANAR’s conduct, as herein set forth, adversely altered the

10
11

condition of DAVILA’S employment.
64.

DAVILA has been informed and believes and thereon alleges that a reasonable woman of

12

her age, in her circumstances, would have considered the conduct of QUINTANAR, as alleged

13

herein, to have created a work environment that was hostile and abusive. In fact, DAVILA did

14

consider her work environment to be hostile and abusive based on QUINTANAR’s actions,

15

statements and conduct.

16

65.

QUINTANAR therefore subjected DAVILA to extremely harassing conduct based on her

17

sex/gender. ABM thereafter failed to take immediate, appropriate, or adequate corrective and/or

18

remedial measures and/or actions, to protect DAVILA from QUINTANAR, thereby violating of

19

Government Code §§ 12940(k) and 12940(j)(1). In fact, ABM not only failed to take any remedial

20

steps against the aforesaid conduct of QUINTANAR, as herein set forth, but approved, ratified,

21

encouraged, aided, incited and/or conspired with QUINTANAR, a managing employee, in carrying

22

out the subject harassment herein complained of.

23

L•B
LAW

62.

66.

Therefore, as a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of QUINTANAR’s conduct

24

and behavior, as herein alleged, as well as ABM’S failure to take immediate, appropriate, or

25

adequate corrective and/or remedial measures in violation of Government Code §§ 12940(k) and

26

12940(j)(1), DAVILA suffered substantial loss of tangible job benefits, in addition to anxiety,

27

trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread, fear, worry, embarrassment, humiliation, shame, mental and

28

emotional distress and discomfort, all to her damage in an amount to be proven at trial.
18.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

67.

2

behavior, as herein described and alleged, as well as ABM’S omissions, as herein set forth, DAVILA

3

has also been caused to retain attorneys and has thus incurred legal fees, expenses and costs, entitling

4

her to reimbursement of same pursuant to Government Code section 12965(b), in an amount to be

5

proven at trial.

6

68.

DEFENDANTS herein, including ABM while acting through its managing agents and/or

7

supervisory employees, including but not limited to QUINTANAR, as herein alleged, committed the

8

acts described and alleged herein deliberately, intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently and

9

maliciously, in conscious disregard for PLAINTIFFS’ rights and safety. As such, DEFENDANTS

10

acted in a willful and intentional manner and its conduct, as herein set forth, was and continues to

11

be despicable, malicious and outrageous in that it caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to

12

needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship. Therefore, DEFENDANTS’ conduct, acts and/or

13

omissions, as herein alleged, justify an award of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter

14

them from engaging in such conduct again in the future.

15

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
SEXUAL ASSAULT & BATTERY
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANTS ABM AND RIVERA)

16
17
18

69.

PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 68 and

incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

19

L•B
LAW

As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of QUINTANAR’s conduct and

70.

At all relevant times mentioned herein, PLAINTIFFS and RIVERA were employed by

20

ABM. On multiple occasions, RIVERA, while action within the course and scope of his employment

21

touched PLAINTIFFS in an unwanted, offensive sexual manner, as herein alleged, with the explicit

22

intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact with an intimate part of PLAINTIFFS’ anatomy or to

23

subject PLAINTIFFS to an imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with

24

RIVERA’S intimate parts, or by use of RIVERA’S intimate parts. PLAINTIFFS neither consented

25

to the contact herein set forth, nor to RIVERA’S conduct. The harmful, offensive contact and

26

conduct of RIVERA, as herein alleged, caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to suffer

27

irreparable injuries and damages as herein set described.

28

///
19.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

71.

2

employment with ABM and PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that

3

ABM, by and through its managing and supervisory employees, knew, must have known, had reason

4

to know and/or should have known of RIVERA’S harassing conduct, as herein alleged, yet failed

5

to take immediate, appropriate, or adequate corrective and/or remedial measures and/or actions to

6

protect PLAINTIFFS from RIVERA. In fact, ABM not only failed to take any preventative measures

7

against the aforesaid harassment, as herein alleged, but approved, ratified, encouraged, aided, incited

8

and/or conspired with RIVERA in carrying out the subject actions, by and through the acts and/or

9

omissions of its managing and/or supervisory agents, including but not limited to, VILLASANA and

10

TREJO.

11

72.

As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of RIVERA’S conduct and actions, as

12

herein described, PLAINTIFFS suffered serious, irreparable injuries and damages, including, but not

13

limited to extreme emotional distress, mental anguish and discomfort, as well as severe anxiety,

14

trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread, fear, worry, embarrassment, humiliation and shame all to

15

his damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

16

73.

ABM and RIVERA’S conduct, as herein described and alleged were carried out

17

deliberately, intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently and maliciously, in conscious disregard for

18

PLAINTIFFS’ rights and safety. As such, ABM and RIVERA acted in a willful and intentional

19

manner and their conduct, as herein set forth, was and continues to be despicable, malicious, and

20

outrageous in that it caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and unjust

21

hardship. Therefore, ABM’S and RIVERA’S conduct and actions, as herein alleged, justify an

22

award of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter them from ever engaging

23

in such conduct again in the future.

24

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANTS ABM AND RIVERA)

25
26

L•B
LAW

RIVERA actions, as herein alleged, occurred during the course and scope of his

74.

PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 73 and

27

incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

28

///
20.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

75.

2

ABM. At all relevant times mentioned herein, RIVERA subjected PLAINTIFFS to a concerted,

3

routine and repeated pattern of offensive, abusive and unwanted sexual harassment, which was

4

directly related to their sex/gender. The treatment PLAINTIFFS were subjected to, as herein alleged,

5

was of and was sufficiently severe and pervasive so as to adversely alter the condition of their

6

employment.

7

76.

All PLAINTIFFS personally experienced the herein alleged harassment and MARCOS and

8

AGUILAR also personally witnessed it as RIVERA carried it out against their co-workers in their

9

immediate work environment. PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that

10

reasonable women of their age, in their circumstances, would have considered the conduct they

11

witnessed to have created a hostile and abusive work environment and PLAINTIFFS did consider

12

their work environment as such.

13

77.

PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that ABM, by and

14

through its managing and supervisory employees, as herein alleged, knew, must have known, had

15

reason to know and/or should have known of RIVERA’S harassing conduct, as herein alleged, yet

16

failed to take immediate, appropriate, or adequate corrective and/or remedial measures and/or

17

actions, in violation of Government Code §§ 12940(k) and 12940(j)(1). In fact, ABM not only failed

18

to take preventative measures against the aforesaid harassment, but tacitly and/or affirmatively

19

approved, ratified, encouraged, aided, incited and/or conspired with RIVERA in carrying out the

20

subject harassment, by and through the acts and/or omissions of VILLASANA and TREJO.

21

L•B
LAW

At all relevant times mentioned herein, PLAINTIFFS and RIVERA were employed by

78.

Therefore, as a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of RIVERA’S conduct and

22

behavior, as herein alleged, as well as ABM’S failure to take immediate, appropriate, or adequate

23

corrective and/or remedial measures and/or action, in violation of Government Code §§ 12940(k)

24

and 12940(j)(1), PLAINTIFFS suffered substantial loss of tangible job benefits, in addition to

25

anxiety, trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread, fear, worry, embarrassment, humiliation, shame,

26

mental and emotional distress and discomfort, all to their damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

27

///

28

///
21.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

79.

2

behavior, as herein described and alleged, as well as ABM’S failure to take immediate and

3

appropriate or adequate corrective and/or remedial measures and/or action, as herein set forth,

4

PLAINTIFFS have also been caused to retain attorneys and have thus incurred legal fees, expenses

5

and costs, entitling them to reimbursement of same pursuant to Government Code section 12965(b),

6

in an amount to be proven at trial.

7

80.

ABM, by and through its managing agents and/or supervisory employees, as herein alleged,

8

committed the acts described and alleged herein deliberately, intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently

9

and maliciously, in conscious disregard for PLAINTIFFS’ rights and safety. As such, ABM acted

10

in a willful and intentional manner and its conduct, as herein set forth, was and continues to be

11

despicable, malicious and outrageous in that it caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to

12

needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship. Therefore, ABM’S conduct, acts and/or omissions, as

13

herein alleged, justify an award of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter

14

it from ever engaging in such conduct again in the future.

15

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANTS ABM AND RIVERA
AS WELL AS AGAINST QUINTANAR BY DAVILA)

16
17
18
19

81.

PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 80 and

incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

20

L•B
LAW

As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of RIVERA’S conduct and

82.

the Ralph Civil Rights Act, codified by California Civil Code §51.7, prohibits all violence

21

or intimidation committed because of the victim’s immutable personal characteristics such as, inter

22

alia, his/her sex/gender. The Bane Civil Rights Act, codified by California Civil Code §52.1,

23

prohibits all interference or attempted interference with another’s rights by intimidation, coercion

24

and/or threats, regardless of whether or not the victim is in a protected class. Civil Code §52(b) and

25

Civil Code §52.1 provide a right of private civil actions for damages when the Ralph and Bane Civil

26

Rights Acts are violated and attorneys fees are also awardable pursuant to Sections 52(b)(3) and

27

52.1(h).

28

///
22.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

RIVERA, during the course and scope of his employment with ABM and with ABM’S

2

approval, consent, or ratification, as herein alleged, intimidated and coerced, as well as committed

3

and/or threatened to commit acts of violence against PLAINTIFFS strictly based on their sex/gender.

4

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that, at all relevant times mentioned

5

herein, any reasonable women, in PLAINTIFFS’ position, would have been coerced, intimidated

6

and/or threatened by RIVERA and would have believed that he was capable of carrying out his

7

threats. In fact, PLAINTIFFS were intimidated and coerced by RIVERA, as herein alleged.

8

84.

Likewise, QUINTANAR during the course and scope of his employment with ABM and

9

with ABM’S approval, consent, or ratification, as herein alleged, intimidated, coerced and threatened

10

DAVILA with what she perceived to be the threat of violence, as herein set forth, solely based on

11

her sex/gender, her complaints, her opposition to ABM’S illegal employment practices, her age, her

12

perceived or actual disabilities and her need for reasonable accommodations. DAVILA is informed

13

and believe and thereon allege that a reasonable woman in her position would have been intimidated,

14

coerced and/or threatened by QUINTANAR and would have believed that he would carry out his

15

threats. In fact, DAVILA was intimidated and coerced by QUINTANAR, as herein alleged.

16

85.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that ABM, by and through its

17

managing and supervisory employees knew, had reason to know, or should have known of the acts

18

of intimidation, coercion, violence and/or threats thereof, that were carried out against PLAINTIFFS

19

by RIVERA and against DAVILA by QUINTANAR, as herein alleged. Nevertheless, ABM did

20

nothing to protect PLAINTIFFS nor did it prevent RIVERA and QUINTANAR’s conduct. To the

21

contrary, PLAINTIFFS have been informed and believe and thereon allege that ABM, by and

22

through the acts and/or omissions of its managing and supervisory employees, actually approved of,

23

consented to and/or ratified the acts and conduct of RIVERA and QUINTANAR as herein alleged.

24

L•B
LAW

83.

86.

As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of DEFENDANTS’ conduct and

25

actions, as herein described, PLAINTIFFS suffered serious, irreparable injuries and damages,

26

including, but not limited to extreme emotional distress, mental anguish and discomfort, as well as

27

severe anxiety, trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread, fear, worry, embarrassment, humiliation and

28

shame all to his damage in an amount to be proven at trial.
23.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

87.

2

actions, as herein described, PLAINTIFFS have been forced to retain attorneys and have incurred

3

legal fees, expenses and costs, entitling them to reimbursement of same pursuant to Civil Code

4

52(b)(3) and 52.1(h), in an amount to be proven at trial.

5

88.

DEFENDANTS’ conduct, as herein described and alleged was carried out deliberately,

6

intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently and maliciously, in conscious disregard for PLAINTIFFS’

7

rights and safety. As such, DEFENDANTS acted in a willful and intentional manner and their

8

conduct, as herein set forth, was and continues to be despicable, malicious, and outrageous in that

9

it caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship.

10

Therefore, DEFENDANTS’ conduct and actions justify an award of punitive damages in an amount

11

sufficient to deter them from ever engaging in such conduct again in the future.

12

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEX/GENDER IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

13
14
15
16

89.

PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 88 and

incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.
90.

At all relevant times mentioned herein, Government Code §12940(a) prohibits an employer,

17

such as ABM, from discriminating against its employees in compensation, or in terms, conditions,

18

or privileges of employment based upon their sex/gender. At all relevant times mentioned herein,

19

PLAINTIFFS were a member of a protected class of persons under Government Code §12940, et

20

seq.

21

L•B
LAW

As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of DEFENDANTS’ conduct and

91.

To wit, PLAINTIFFS were women employees who were the targets of repeated, continuous

22

and pervasive sexual harassment and related intimidation, coercion, violence and/or threats of

23

violence at the hands of RIVERA and DAVILA also at the hands of QUINTANAR, as herein

24

alleged. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that ABM, by and through its

25

managing agents and/or supervisory employees, as herein alleged, knew, must have known, should

26

have known and/or had reason to know of the continuous and unwelcomed conduct of RIVERA

27

towards PLAINTIFFS, in addition to the manner in which QUINTANAR treated and/or behaved

28

toward DAVILA, as herein alleged.
24.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

92.

2

relevant times mentioned herein had, a purported no-tolerance policy against the specific type of

3

conduct exhibited by RIVERA and QUINTANAR. Nevertheless, ABM took no steps to prevent,

4

proscribe and/or forestall RIVERA from continuing his behavior towards PLAINTIFFS and also

5

failed to implement its own policies and procedures concerning such conduct because of

6

PLAINTIFFS’ gender/sex. ABM likewise failed to take steps to prevent, proscribe and/or forestall

7

QUINTANAR from acting in the manner herein described toward DAVILA due to her gender/sex,

8

as herein alleged. Instead, by and through the acts and/or omissions of its managing agents and/or

9

supervisory employees, as herein set forth, ABM expressly and/or impliedly consented to, condoned,

10

authorized, approved, encouraged and/or ratified RIVERA’S and QUINTANAR’S conduct and

11

behavior, as herein set alleged and described.

12

93.

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that their sex/gender was a

13

substantial and determining factor in ABM’S failure to take immediate appropriate corrective action

14

to protect them and/or prevent them from being exposed to the type of conduct and behavior herein

15

described. As such, ABM’S failure to act was wrongful and discriminatory and in violation of

16

Government Code, §12940(a).

17

94.

As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S discriminatory conduct, acts,

18

or omissions, carried forth by and through its managing agents and/or supervisory employees, as

19

herein alleged, PLAINTIFFS suffered substantial and tangible loss of job benefits, anxiety, panic,

20

fear, dread, worry, shame, trepidation, apprehension, embarrassment, humiliation, mental and

21

emotional distress and discomfort, all to their damage in an amount to be proven.

22

L•B
LAW

PLAINTIFFS are informed and believes and thereon allege that ABM has and at all

95.

As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S discriminatory

23

conduct, acts, or omissions, PLAINTIFFS have also had to retain attorneys and have incurred legal

24

fees, expenses and costs, entitling them to reimbursement thereof Government Code §12965(b), in

25

an amount to be proven.

26

///

27

///

28

///
25.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

ABM, through its managing agents and/or supervisory employees, committed the acts

2

and/or omissions described herein, deliberately, intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently and

3

maliciously, in conscious disregard for PLAINTIFFS rights and safety. ABM acted in a willful and

4

intentional manner and its conduct was and continues to be despicable, malicious and outrageous

5

having caused and continuing to cause PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship.

6

Therefore, ABM’S conduct, acts and/or omissions, justify an award of punitive and exemplary

7

damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from ever engaging in such conduct again in the future.

8

10

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO ENGAGE IN A TIMELY GOOD FAITH INTERACTIVE PROCESS
AND TO ACCOMMODATE IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(DAVILA AND MARCOS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

11

97.

9

12
13

PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 20, 30

through 32, 34 and 55 through 57 and incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.
98.

Government Code §12940(n) requires an employer who knows of or has reason to know

14

of an employee’s disabilities, perceived or otherwise, to engage that employees in a timely good faith

15

interactive process to identify all reasonable accommodations available and Government Code

16

§12940(m) requires that the employer furnish available reasonable accommodations to said

17

employee. DAVILA and MARCOS, suffered work-injuries that caused them serious disabilities

18

which limited at least one of their major life activities. DAVILA and MARCOS’ disabilities further

19

necessitated the need for reasonable accommodations so as to allow them to perform the essential

20

duties of their employment with ABM without aggravation of said disabilities. ABM was aware of

21

DAVILA and MARCOS’ disabilities as well as their needs since they informed it of same.

22

L•B
LAW

96.

99.

Had ABM furnished DAVILA and MARCOS with reasonable accommodations for their

23

disabilities, they would have been able to perform the essential functions of their job without

24

aggravating their disabilities and there would have been no danger to either DAVILA and

25

MARCOS’, or any other person’s health and safety. DAVILA and MARCOS are informed and

26

believe and thereon alleges that the reasonable accommodations necessitated by their disabilities

27

would not have created an undue hardship upon ABM, nor would such accommodations have

28

adversely impacted, in any way, the operation of ABM’S business.
26.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

100. Nevertheless, ABM not only failed to engage DAVILA and MARCOS in a timely, good

2

faith, interactive process in order to identify all available accommodations for their disabilities, but

3

also failed to reasonably accommodate DAVILA and MARCOS’ needs and disabilities, which in

4

turn caused aggravation and exacerbation of said injuries and disabilities, as herein alleged.

5

101. As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S discriminatory acts carried

6

forth by and through its managing agents and/or supervisory employees, DAVILA and MARCOS

7

suffered and continue to suffer, substantial losses in earnings and job benefits, emotional distress,

8

mental anguish and discomfort, and severe anxiety, trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread, fear,

9

worry, embarrassment, humiliation and shame, all to their damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

10

102. As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S discriminatory acts

11

carried forth by and through its aforesaid managing agents and/or supervisory employees, DAVILA

12

and MARCOS have also had to retain attorneys, thereby incurring legal fees, expenses and costs,

13

entitling them to reimbursement of same pursuant to Government Code §12965(b), in an amount to

14

be proven.

15

103. ABM, by and through its managing agents and/or supervisory employees, committed the

16

acts described and alleged herein oppressively, fraudulently and maliciously, in conscious disregard

17

for DAVILA and MARCOS’ rights. As such, ABM acted in a willful and intentional manner and

18

its conduct, as herein described, was and continues to be despicable, malicious and outrageous in that

19

it has caused and continues to cause DAVILA and MARCOS to suffer cruel and unjust hardship

20

needlessly. Therefore, ABM’S conduct, acts and/or omissions, as herein set forth, justify an award

21

of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from ever engaging in such

22

conduct again in the future.

23

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(DAVILA AND MARCOS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

24

L•B
LAW

25

104. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 20, 30

26

through 32, 34 and 55 through 57 and incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

27

///

28

///
27.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 L•B
LAW

1

105. At all relevant times mentioned herein, FEHA prohibits an employer from discriminating

2

against its employees who have disabilities limiting a major life activity, or who the employer

3

regards as, or perceives to have such disabilities. At all relevant times mentioned herein, DAVILA

4

and MARCOS were members of a protected class of persons under FEHA, as codified by

5

Government Code §12940, et seq., in that they were employees who had disabilities limiting a major

6

life activity as delineated by Government Code §12926, et seq.

7

106. DAVILA and MARCOS are informed and believe and thereon allege that their disabilities,

8

whether actual and/or perceived by ABM, in addition to their need for reasonable accommodations,

9

their protests and/or complaints and DAVILA making known her intention to file a workers’

10

compensation claim, were all substantial, motivating and/or determining factors in the discriminatory

11

treatment that they were subjected to, as herein alleged, including the termination of their

12

employments. Accordingly, ABM’S conduct, acts and/or omissions, as herein alleged, were unlawful

13

and discriminatory, in violation of Government Code §§ 12940(a) and 12940(j)(1).

14

107. As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S discriminatory conduct, acts,

15

or omissions, as herein alleged, MARCOS and DAVILA have suffered and continue to suffer,

16

substantial losses in earnings and job benefits, humiliation, embarrassment, mental and emotional

17

distress and discomfort, all to their damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

18

108. As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of said discriminatory conduct,

19

acts, or omissions, DAVILA and MARCOS have also been caused to retain attorneys and have thus

20

incurred legal fees, expenses and costs, entitling them to reimbursement of same pursuant to

21

Government Code §12965(b), in an amount to be proven at trial.

22

109. ABM committed the acts and/or omissions described herein deliberately, intentionally,

23

oppressively, fraudulently, maliciously and in conscious disregard for DAVILA and MARCOS’

24

rights and safety. ABM acted in an intentional, willful manner and its conduct was and continues to

25

be despicable, malicious and outrageous, having caused and continuing to cause DAVILA and

26

MARCOS cruel and unjust hardship. Therefore, ABM’S conduct justifies an award of punitive

27

damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from engaging in such conduct again. Punitive damages

28

are further warranted to deter other employers from also behaving in the same manner as ABM.
28.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
DISCRIMINATION BASED ON AGE IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(DAVILA AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

2
3
4

L•B
LAW

110. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 20, 46
and 57 and incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

5

111. At all relevant times mentioned herein, FEHA prohibits an employer from discriminating

6

against its employees who have disabilities limiting a major life activity, or who the employer

7

regards as, or perceives to have such disabilities. At all relevant times mentioned herein, DAVILA

8

was a member of a protected class of persons under FEHA, as codified by Government Code

9

§12940, et seq., in that she was an employee who was over the age of 40.

10

112. At all relevant times mentioned herein, DAVILA performed her job duties precisely as

11

required by ABM and to ABM’S complete satisfaction. Notwithstanding, ABM, by and through its

12

managing agents and supervisory employees with ABM’S consent, approval and/or ratification,

13

terminated DAVILA’S decade-long employment and immediately replaced her with someone

14

substantially younger. DAVILA is informed and believes and thereon alleges that her age was a

15

substantial determining factor in ABM’S discriminatory conduct, as herein described. Therefore,

16

the wrongful, discriminatory conduct DAVILA herein complains of, amounted to an unlawful,

17

discriminatory employment practice in violation of Gov. Code §12940(a).

18

113. As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S discriminatory conduct, acts,

19

or omissions, as herein alleged, DAVILA has suffered and continues to suffer, substantial losses in

20

earnings and job benefits, humiliation, embarrassment, mental and emotional distress and

21

discomfort, all to his damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

22

114. As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of said discriminatory conduct,

23

acts, or omissions, DAVILA has also been caused to retain attorneys and has thus incurred legal fees,

24

expenses and costs, entitling her to reimbursement of same pursuant to Gov. Code §12965(b), in an

25

amount to be proven at trial.

26

///

27

///

28

///
29.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

115. Moreover, ABM committed the acts and/or omissions described herein deliberately,

2

intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently, maliciously and in conscious disregard for DAVILA’S

3

rights and safety. As such, ABM acted in a willful and intentional manner and its conduct was and

4

continues to be despicable, malicious and outrageous, having caused and continuing to cause

5

DAVILA to suffer cruel and unjust hardship. Therefore, ABM’S conduct, as herein alleged, justifies

6

an award of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from ever engaging

7

in such conduct again in the future. Punitive and exemplary damages are further warranted to deter

8

other employers who are similarly situated to ABM from also behaving in the same manner as ABM.

9

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT
IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

10
11
12
13

L•B
LAW

116. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 115 and
incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

14

117. During PLAINTIFFS’ employment, ABM failed to prevent the discrimination and

15

harassment they suffered as herein described. By failing to prevent the herein alleged acts of

16

discrimination and harassment, by wholly failing to undertake a prompt and adequate investigation

17

of the unlawful conduct herein described and by failing to take any action in response to said

18

conduct, ABM violated Government Code §§ 12940(k) and 12940(j)(1).

19

118. As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S failures to act, as herein

20

alleged, PLAINTIFFS have suffered and continue to suffer, substantial damages including, but not

21

limited to benefits, humiliation, embarrassment, mental and emotional distress and discomfort, in

22

an amount to be proven at trial.

23

119. As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S failures to act

24

PLAINTIFFS have also been caused to retain attorneys and have thus incurred legal fees, expenses

25

and costs, entitling them to reimbursement of same pursuant to Government Code §12965(b), in an

26

amount to be proven at trial.

27

///

28

///
30.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

120. ABM’S omissions, as herein alleged, were committed oppressively, fraudulently and

2

maliciously in conscious disregard for PLAINTIFFS’ rights and safety. As such, ABM acted in a

3

willful and intentional manner and its conduct was and continues to be despicable, malicious and

4

outrageous in that it has caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and

5

unjust hardship. Therefore, ABM’S conduct, as herein alleged, justifies an award of punitive

6

damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from ever engaging in such conduct again. Punitive

7

damages are further warranted to deter other employers, like ABM, from behaving similarly.

8

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

9
10
11

L•B
LAW

121. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 120 and
incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

12

122. Government Code §12940(h) makes it unlawful for an employer to retaliate against an

13

employee because of the employee’s opposition to any practice forbidden by FEHA, including, but

14

not limited to, opposing employment practices that the employee reasonably believes exist and

15

further believes are in violation of FEHA, as well as participating in an activity the employer

16

perceives as being in opposition to discrimination, whether intended or not by the employee

17

expressing the opposition. Labor Code §1102.5(b) makes it likewise illegal for an employer to

18

retaliate against an employee who discloses unlawful conduct to a government or law enforcement

19

agency where the employee reasonably believes the information discloses a violation of state statute.

20

123. DAVILA, as herein alleged, openly complained and protested about ABM’S illegal

21

practices. DAVILA also made it known, and/or ABM perceived, that she intended to file a workers’

22

compensation claim against ABM. Furthermore, DAVILA in defiance of ABM’S admonishment

23

not to, filed a police report for the unlawful acts herein described.

24

124. Immediately thereafter, DAVILA’S 10 year employment with ABM was abruptly

25

terminated. DAVILA is informed and believes and thereon alleges that her actions, as herein alleged,

26

were a substantial motivating and determining reason for ABM’S decision to terminate her

27

employment.

28

///
31.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

125. Additionally, AGUILAR and MARCOS, as herein alleged, also openly complained and

2

protested ABM’S illegal practices. On or about April 6, 2012, AGUILAR and MARCOS both filed

3

their Complaint for Damages against ABM, and on or about May 2, 2012, served ABM with same.

4

Almost immediately thereafter, on or about May 30, 2012, AGUILAR’s 12 year employment and

5

MARCOS’ 15 year employment with ABM were abruptly terminated. AGUILAR and MARCOS

6

are informed and believe and thereon allege that their actions, as herein alleged, were a substantial

7

motivating and determining reason for ABM’S decision to terminate their employment.

8

126. As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S retaliatory conduct, acts, or

9

omissions, as herein alleged, PLAINTIFFS suffered and continue to suffer substantial and tangible

10

loss of job benefits, as well as humiliation, embarrassment, mental and emotional distress and

11

discomfort, all to his damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

12

127. As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S retaliatory conduct,

13

acts, or omissions, PLAINTIFFS have also been caused to retain attorneys and have thus incurred

14

legal fees, expenses and costs, entitling them to reimbursement of same pursuant to Gov. Code

15

section 12965(b), in an amount to be proven at trial.

16

128. Furthermore, ABM committed the retaliatory acts and/or omissions described and alleged

17

herein, deliberately, intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently, maliciously and in conscious disregard

18

for PLAINTIFFS’ rights and safety. As such, ABM acted in a willful and intentional manner and

19

its conduct, as herein set forth, was and continues to be despicable, malicious and outrageous in that

20

it caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship.

21

Therefore, ABM’S retaliatory conduct, as herein alleged, justifies an award of punitive and

22

exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from ever engaging in such conduct again.

23

Punitive and exemplary damages are further warranted to deter other employers who are similarly

24

situated to ABM from also behaving in the same manner as ABM.

25
26
27

L•B
LAW

28

ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
WRONGFUL DISCHARGE
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)
129. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 128 and
incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.
32.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 L•B
LAW

1

130. By terminating PLAINTIFFS’ employment, as herein alleged and by refusing to reinstate

2

them, ABM violated the fundamental public policies of the State of California embodied in, inter

3

alia, FEHA as codified by Government Code §12900 et seq., as well as Labor Code §§ 132(a) and

4

1102.5. Likewise, Labor Code §132(a) establishes a fundamental public policy against the actions

5

of any employer who discharges, threatens to discharge, or in any manner discriminates against an

6

employee because the employee has been injured on the job, has filed a workers’ compensation

7

claim, or has made known his/her intention to file a workers’ compensation claim.

8

131. Government Code §12920 identifies the policy of this State to be the protection and

9

safeguarding of the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain and hold employment without

10

discrimination on the basis of their disability. Government Code §12940(h) makes it unlawful for

11

an employer to retaliate against an employee because of the employee’s opposition to any practice

12

forbidden by FEHA, including, but not limited to, opposing employment practices that the employee

13

reasonably believes exist and further believes are in violation of FEHA, as well as participating in

14

an activity the employer perceives as being in opposition to discrimination, whether intended or not

15

by the employee expressing the opposition.

16

132. Finally, Labor Code §1102.5(b) makes it illegal for an employer to retaliate against an

17

employee who discloses unlawful conduct to a government or law enforcement agency where the

18

employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state statute.

19

Therefore, by terminating PLAINTIFFS’ employment in the manner herein alleged, ABM violated

20

the fundamental public policies of this State.

21

133. As a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S illegal conduct, as herein

22

alleged, PLAINTIFFS have suffered and continue to suffer, substantial losses in earnings and job

23

benefits, humiliation, embarrassment, mental and emotional distress and discomfort, all to their

24

damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

25

134. As a further direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of ABM’S conduct,

26

PLAINTIFFS have retained attorneys and have incurred legal fees, expenses and costs, entitling them

27

to reimbursement of pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §1021.5, in an amount to be proven at trial.

28

///
33.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

135. Furthermore, ABM committed the illegal acts and/or omissions described and alleged

2

herein, deliberately, intentionally, oppressively, fraudulently, maliciously and in conscious disregard

3

for PLAINTIFFS’ rights and safety. As such, ABM acted in a willful and intentional manner and

4

its conduct, as herein set forth, was and continues to be despicable, malicious and outrageous in that

5

it caused and continues to cause PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship.

6

Therefore, ABM’S retaliatory conduct, as herein alleged, justifies an award of punitive and

7

exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to deter it from ever engaging in such conduct again.

8

Punitive and exemplary damages are further warranted to deter other employers who are similarly

9

situated to ABM from also behaving in the same manner as ABM.

10

TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)

11
12
13

L•B
LAW

136. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 135 and
incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

14

137. The wrongful and unlawful practices and other misconduct set forth herein, committed by

15

DEFENDANTS, as herein alleged, exceeded the normal risks of the employment relationship that

16

PLAINTIFFS had with ABM. DEFENDANTS wrongfully, wilfully and/or intentionally sought to

17

inflict emotional distress upon PLAINTIFFS through the conduct, actions and/or omissions

18

described herein. As such, the subject conduct was so extreme and outrageous that it exceeded the

19

boundaries of a decent society and lies outside the compensation bargain.

20

138. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon allege that DEFENDANTS knew, must

21

have known, should have known, or had reason to know that their conduct, as herein alleged, was

22

substantially certain to inflict emotional distress upon PLAINTIFFS. As such, DEFENDANTS’

23

conduct was intentional, malicious and carried out with a deliberate, conscious and/or reckless

24

disregard of the high degree of probability that such conduct would inflict extreme emotional distress

25

upon PLAINTIFFS. Additionally, the aforesaid conduct was also in direct violation of California

26

law and public policy.

27

///

28

///
34.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

139. Therefore, as a direct, foreseeable, legal and proximate result of said DEFENDANTS’

2

intentional, wilful, deliberate conduct, as herein alleged, PLAINTIFFS suffered and continue to

3

suffer loss of his reputation, shame, mortification, humiliation, embarrassment, severe mental and

4

emotional distress and anguish as well as severe anxiety, trepidation, apprehension, panic, dread,

5

fear, worry, and hurt feelings all to their damages in an amount to be proven at trial. The acts,

6

omissions and conduct of DEFENDANTS was and continues to be oppressive, deliberate,

7

intentional, reprehensible and malicious and was carried out in conscious disregard of their probable

8

outcome.

9

140. DEFENDANTS acted in a willful, deliberate and intentional manner and their conduct was

10

and continues to be despicable, malicious and outrageous in that it has caused and continues to cause

11

PLAINTIFFS to needlessly suffer cruel and unjust hardship. Thus, DEFENDANTS’ conduct,

12

actions and/or omissions, as herein set forth, justify an award of punitive damages in an amount

13

sufficient to deter them from ever engaging in such conduct again in the future.

14

THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
(ALL PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT ABM)

15
16
17

L•B
LAW

141. PLAINTIFFS re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 140 and
incorporate each by reference as though set forth in full herein.

18

142. ABM has engaged in unfair, unlawful and fraudulent activity, in direct violation of the

19

provisions of the Unfair Competition Law, codified by Business & Professions Code §17200 et seq.

20

Business & Professions Code §17200 et seq. makes it unlawful to obtain any type of business or

21

unfair advantage through illegal conduct or violations of law. ABM’S violations occurred when it

22

failed to accommodate; retaliated against and wrongfully terminating its employees for the reasons

23

herein alleged; by harassing its employees based on their sex/gender; by discriminating against its

24

employees as herein alleged; and by failing to prevent the aforesaid harassment and discrimination,

25

as herein alleged.

26

///

27

///

28

///
35.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 1

143. PLAINTIFFS are informed and believe and thereon alleges that the aforesaid actions of

2

ABM were carried out specifically for the purpose of gaining an advantage against its competitors.

3

PLAINTIFFS are further informed and believe and thereon alleges that, by violating the law and/or

4

not abiding by the laws as well as reducing costs, including but not limited to workers’ compensation

5

insurance costs, liability insurance costs, as well as avoiding the costs and expenses associated with

6

providing reasonable accommodations for its disabled employees, ABM did in fact obtain an unfair

7

advantage over a competitor who and resulted in an increase in profits, enabling it to greater generate

8

income as a direct result of the above-mentioned unlawful and unfair business practices.

9

144. PLAINTIFFS are therefore entitled to restitution and/or disgorgement of any and all monies

10

received by ABM through its illegal conduct and while it engaged in such practices. PLAINTIFFS

11

are also entitled to and hereby seek prejudgment interest, penalties, reasonable attorneys’ fees and

12

costs, pursuant to Business & Professions Code §17200 et seq. PLAINTIFFS further seek to enjoin

13

ABM from carrying out such illegal and unfair activities again in the future.

14
15
16

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS hereby demand judgment against DEFENDANTS,
inclusive of DOES 1 to 100, as follows:

17

1.

For economic and non-economic damages;

18

2.

For exemplary and punitive damages according to proof;

19

3.

For pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate;

20

4.

For reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to California law, including, but not limited

21

to, Code of Civil Procedure §1021.5, Government Code §12965(b), and Civil Code

22

§§ 52.1(h) and 52(b)(3);

23

5.

24

L•B
LAW

For injunctive relief, restitution and/or disgorgement against ABM pursuant to
Business and Professions Code §17200 et seq.;

25

6.

For costs of suit incurred herein; and

26

7.

For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

27

///

28

///
36.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 

Dated:   




 2
HM - 
?Saw32%?

EL

ASSOCIATES

132 



LAINTIFFS,
f? DAVILA

ABETH MARCOS
AN ELICA AGUILAR

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES