Filing # 46624098 E-Filed 09/19/2016 03:21:36 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
LAUREN KUSNER,

CASE NO.:

Plaintiff,
vs.
DR. GOPAL BASISHT;
GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR,
and DR. SAROJ BASISHT
Defendants.
________/

COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER, by and through her undersigned counsel, brings this
Complaint against Defendants, DR. GOPAL BASISHT, GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR, and
DR. SAROJ BASISHT, and states as follows:

INTRODUCTION
1.

This is an action arising from the uninvited sexual touching of LAUREN KUSNER

(hereinafter “KUSNER”) and other lewd behavior by her rheumatologist DR. GOPAL BASISHT
while she was at a medical appointment with DR. GOPAL BASISHT at the medical office of
GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR (“BASISHT PTR”), located at 1300 Edgewater Drive,
Orlando, Florida.

JURISDICTION AND PARTIES
2.

Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER, is an adult female who is a citizen and resident of

the State of Florida.

1

 3.

Defendant, DR. GOPAL BASISHT, was at all material times a physician who was

licensed and practicing medicine in Florida as a rheumatologist. He is a citizen and resident of the
State of Florida. At all material times, DR. GOPAL BASISHT was employed as a physician and
as a partner in the medical practice BASISHT, PTR.
4.

At all material times, BASISHT PTR was a partnership registered to do business in

the State of Florida with a principal place of business of 1300 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida.
BASISHT PTR was at all material times a partnership comprised of partners DR. GOPAL
BASISHT and DR. SAROJ BASISHT. DR. SAROJ BASISHT is a citizen and resident of the
State of Florida. At all material times, DR SAROJ BASISHT was employed as a physician and
as a partner in the medical practice BASISHT, PTR.
5.

This Court has jurisdiction in that the Plaintiff in this lawsuit seeks monetary

damages far exceeding the jurisdictional minimum of this Court of $15,000.00, exclusive of
interest, costs, and attorney’s fees.
6.

Venue properly lies in this judicial circuit in that the sexual misconduct and other

tortious acts that are the subject of this lawsuit were committed at the medical office located at
1300 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida.
7.

The tortious conduct alleged herein did not arise out of any medical diagnosis,

treatment or care of Plaintiff or even the guise of medical treatment or care.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
8.

On February 18, 2016, KUSNER, a thirty-three year old female, went to the office

of BASISHT PTR to receive medical treatment from DR. GOPAL BASISHT for rheumatologic
issues.

2

 9.

KUSNER entered the examination room to be seen by DR. GOPAL BASISHT.

Unlike her first visit with DR. GOPAL BASISHT, there was no medical assistant or nurse in the
room.
10.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT closed the door behind KUSNER and directed her to lay

down on the examination table.
11.

While KUSNER was laying on the examination table, DR. GOPAL BASISHT

placed his bare hands inside KUSNER’s pants and massaged her vaginal area. DR. GOPAL
BASISHT then put his bare hands underneath the top of KUSNER’s shirt and began directly
massaging KUSNER’s breasts with his hands. The touching of KUSNER’s breasts had no relation
to the purpose of her medical visit or the examination.
12.

KUSNER did not invite, induce, ratify, implicitly consent, or comply with this

sexual contact. To the contrary, KUSNER was mortified and in shock at DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s
actions. KUSNER felt paralyzed, could not speak, and was in disbelief at this violation by her
doctor.
13.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT and KUSNER then exited the examination room and

entered an open room where DR. GOPAL BASISHT wrote a prescription for KUSNER. Just prior
to leaving the office, DR. GOPAL BASISHT faced KUSNER, grabbed her by the shoulder with
both hands, and pulled her close to him. DR BASISHT began to speak very slowly and softly to
KUSNER.

KUSNER became uncomfortable, distressed, and began to cry.

DR. GOPAL

BASISHT then put both arms around KUSNER and said, “I love you” to KUSNER in the presence
of KUSNER’s mother.

3

 14.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s sexual misconduct did not arise out of any diagnosis,

treatment or care of Plaintiff or even the guise of medical care. There was no medical rationale
for DR. GOPAL BASISHT to touch KUSNER’s vaginal area or her breasts.
15.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT initiated unwanted sexual contact with other female

patients in the same manner that he engaged in sexual misconduct with KUSNER.

COUNT I
BATTERY
(AGAINST DEFENDANT DR. GOPAL BASISHT)
Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 15 above.
16.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT committed a battery upon LAUREN KUSNER consisting

of intentional, harmful, unwanted and offensive sexual contact upon her breasts and vaginal area.
17.

As a direct and proximate cause of the foregoing, LAUREN KUSNER has suffered

psychological, emotional, and physical injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish, pain and
suffering and the loss of enjoyment of life.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER, demands judgment against Defendant, DR.
GOPAL BASISHT, for compensatory damages, costs and such other and further relief as this
Court deems proper.

COUNT II
RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR / VICARIOUS LIABILITY
(AGAINST DEFENDANT GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR)
Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 15 above.
18.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT was at all material times a paid employee and managing

agent of BASISHT PTR.

4

 19.

BASISHT PTR authorized DR. GOPAL BASISHT to be alone with LAUREN

KUSNER and other female patients, and to have unfettered and unsupervised control, access to
and physical contact with KUSNER while KUSNER was at its office for medical appointments.
20.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s acts of battery and offensive touching upon KUSNER

were initiated and took place within the course, time, and scope of DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s
performance of those duties. The acts occurred in a patient room where DR. GOPAL BASISHT
was required to perform his employment duties by BASISHT PTR.
21.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s actions occurred during normal working hours while he

was there to examine a patient at BASISHT PTR on behalf of the medical practices.
22.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s contact and relationship with KUSNER was at all times

in furtherance of BASISHT PTR’s business interests.
23.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT was authorized to make bodily contact with Plaintiff. DR.

GOPAL BASISHT’s actions were committed in the actual or apparent course and scope of his
employment and his sexual misconduct was ratified by BASISHT PTR.
24.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s wrongful acts were committed while DR. GOPAL

BASISHT was doing what his employment or agency contemplated. DR. GOPAL BASISHT
extended and converted his authorized medical touching of Plaintiff’s body into the sexual contact
with Plaintiff.
25.

DR. GOPAL BASISHT was aided in accomplishing the tort upon Plaintiff by the

existence of his agency relationship with BASISHT PTR. Specifically, DR. GOPAL BASISHT
used the professional authority actually delegated to him by BASISHT PTR to make physical
contact with Plaintiff while she was alone with him seeking professional treatment. She was in

5

 this vulnerable position with DR. GOPAL BASISHT precisely because of DR. GOPAL
BASISHT’s agency relationship with BASISHT PTR.
26.

Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, BASISHT PTR is responsible for the

actions of their servant, partner and/or agent, DR. GOPAL BASISHT, committed in the actual or
apparent scope of his duties.
27.

As a direct and proximate cause of the foregoing, LAUREN KUSNER has suffered

psychological, emotional, and physical injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish, pain and
suffering and the loss of enjoyment of life.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER demands judgment against Defendant,
GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR for compensatory damages, costs and such other and further
relief as this Court deems just and proper.

COUNT III
DIRECT LIABILITY
(AGAINST DEFENDANT GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR)
Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 15 above.
28.

At all relevant times, DR. GOPAL BASISHT was a managing partner in GOPAL

& SAROJ BASISHT, PTR with responsibility for the conduct and operations of the medical
practice.
29.

By virtue of DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s position as a managing partner who defined

his own role within BASISHT PTR., the acts of DR. GOPAL BASISHT are indistinguishable from
the acts of BASISHT PTR.
30.

By virtue of DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s position as a managing agent, DR. GOPAL

BASISHT was able to commit acts of battery upon KUSNER.

6

 31.

BASISHT PTR is directly liable for the intentional torts committed by their

managing agent, DR. GOPAL BASISHT, by virtue of his position.
32.

As a direct and proximate cause of the sexual misconduct committed by DR.

GOPAL BASISHT and by virtue of his status as managing agent, KUSNER has suffered
psychological, emotional, and physical injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish, pain and
suffering and the loss of enjoyment of life.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER, demands judgment against Defendant,
GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR for compensatory damages, costs and such other and further
relief as this Court deems just and proper.
COUNT IV
PARTNERSHIP LIABILITY
(AGAINST DEFENDANT DR. SAROJ BASISHT)
Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 15 above
33.

At the time of DR. GOLPAL BASISHT’s battery of KUSNER, Defendant, DR.

SAROJ BASISHT was a physician and partner of DR. GOPAL BASISHT in BASISHT PTR.
34.

BASISHT PTR approved and/or ratified the sexual misconduct committed by DR.

GOPAL BASISHT while acting on behalf of BASISHT PTR.
35.

Under Florida partnership law, SAROJ BASISHT is liable for the tortious conduct

that her partner, DR. GOPAL BASISHT, committed upon KUSNER.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER, demands judgment against Defendant, DR.
SAROJ BASISHT, for compensatory damages, costs and such other and further relief as this Court
deems just and proper.

7

 COUNT V
NEGLIGENT RETENTION/SUPERVISION
(AGAINST GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR)
Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 15 above
36.

At all material times, GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR owed a duty to KUSNER

to use reasonable care to ensure her safety, care and well-being while she was at its office and
while obtaining medical services from its physician.
37.

These duties encompassed exercising reasonable supervision with respect to its

employment of DR. GOPAL BASISHT as a medical doctor who was in a position of trust and
authority.
38.

At all relevant times during the period of time he was a medical doctor at GOPAL

& SAROJ BASISHT, PTR, the partnership knew or in the exercise of reasonable care should have
known that DR. GOPAL BASISHT was unfit, dangerous, and a threat to the safety and welfare of
women entrusted to him for medical services. In particular, there had been multiple prior
complaints about DR. GOPAL BASISHT’s sexual misconduct, including but not limited to those
which were made to law enforcement and/or the Florida Department of Health.
39.

GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR breached its duty of care to KUSNER by

failing to adequately supervise DR. GOPAL BASISHT and thereby failing to protect KUSNER
from sexual misconduct, battery and lewd and lascivious acts committed by its employee and
agent, DR. GOPAL BASISHT.
40.

Despite such accrual or constructive notice concerning DR. GOPAL BASISHT,

GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR failed to: (a) adequately supervise DR. GOPAL BASISHT,
(b) assess the risk of future sexual misconduct and implement appropriate protections, (c) protect
its female clients, (d) properly train employees, (e) place limitations on his employment or
8

 otherwise reduce the risk of sexual misconduct, and/or (e) ensure he was properly fit for the duties
assigned. In short, GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR took no meaningful action to protect any
of its female clients from the risk of harm.
41.

As a direct and proximate cause of the foregoing, KUSNER has suffered

psychological, emotional, and physical injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish, pain and
suffering and the loss of enjoyment of life.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, LAUREN KUSNER, demands judgment against Defendant,
GOPAL & SAROJ BASISHT, PTR, for compensatory damages, costs and such other and further
relief as this Court deems just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury and all issues so triable as a matter of right.
CERTIFICATE RE: E-FILING AND E-SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that this Complaint was filed electronically in compliance with
Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.515 and 2.516(e).
I FURTHER CERTIFY for purposes of service of any documents after initial process that
staff.efile@pathtojustice.com is primary.
Dated: September 19, 2016.
FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING,
EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301
(954)524-2820 TELEPHONE
(954)524-2822 Fax

BY:

9

/s/ Adam D. Horowitz
ADAM D. HOROWITZ
Florida Bar No.: 376980