Electronically Filed 9/26/2019 9:58 AM Steven D. Grierson CLERK OF THE COURT 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 COMP RICHARD HARRIS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 505 BENJAMIN CLOWARD, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 11087 BURKE HUBER, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10902 RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM 801 South Fourth St. Las Vegas, NV 89101 Tel. (702) 444-4444 Fax (702) 444-4455 Email:burke@richardharrislaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 CASE NO: A-19-802598-C Department 20 DISTRICT COURT 12 CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA 13 14 BRENNA SCHRADER, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, 15 Plaintiff, CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR 16 vs. 17 STEPHEN ALAN WYNN; an individual; MAURICE WOODEN, an individual, WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC dba WYNN LAS VEGAS a Nevada Limited Liability; WYNN RESORTS, LTD, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1-20, inclusive; ROE CORPORATIONS 120, inclusive, 18 19 20 21 22 CASE NO.: DEPT. NO.: Defendants. 1. 2. 3. 4. 23 24 5. 6. 25 26 27 VIOLATION OF TITLE VII (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000 et. seq.) VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 1589 VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C §§ 1962(b),(c) and (d) (Federal RICO) INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS CIVIL CONSPIRACY VIOLATION OF 29 U.S.C. § 206 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 28 1 Case Number: A-19-802598-C 1 COMES NOW Plaintiff, BRENNA SCHRADER, by and through their attorney, 2 BURKE HUBER, ESQ. of RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM and for the causes of action 3 against Defendants alleges as follows: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 PARTIES AND JURISDICTION 1. At all times relevant, Brenna Schrader (“Ms. Schrader” or “Plaintiff”), was a resident of Clark County, Nevada and an employee of Wynn Resorts, LTD. 2. At all times relevant, Defendant, STEPHEN ALAN WYNN (“Defendant Wynn”), is a resident of Clark County, Nevada and an executive of Wynn Resorts, LTD and Wynn Las Vegas, LLC. 3. At all times relevant, Defendant, MAURICE WOODEN (“Defendant 12 Wooden”), is a resident of Clark County, Nevada an executive of Wynn Resorts, LTD and 13 Wynn Las Vegas, LLC. 14 4. At all times relevant, Defendant, WYNN RESORTS, LLC (“Defendant 15 Resorts”) is a Nevada limited liability company subject to the jurisdiction of Clark County, 16 Nevada. 17 18 19 5. At all times relevant, Defendant WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC dba WYNN LAS VEGAS (“Defendant Wynn Las Vegas”) (collectively Defendants). 6. At all times relevant, the true names and capacities whether individual, 20 corporate, associate, partnership or otherwise of the Defendant herein designated as DOES 1- 21 10, inclusive, are unknown to the Plaintiff who therefore sues said Defendants by such 22 fictitious names. The identities of Defendants DOES 11-20, and ROE CORPORATIONS 1- 23 20, are unknown at this time and may be individuals, corporations, associations, partnerships, 24 subsidiaries, holding companies, owners, predecessor or successor entities, joint venturers, 25 parent corporations or related business entities of Defendants, inclusive, who were acting on 26 behalf of or in concert with, or at the direction of Defendants and may be responsible for the 27 injurious activities of the other Defendants. Plaintiff requests leave of the Court to amend this 28 Complaint to specify the Doe Defendants when their identities become known. Plaintiff will 2 1 ask leave of this court to insert the true names and capacities of such Defendants when the 2 same have been ascertained and will further ask leave to join said Defendants in these 3 proceedings. 5 6 7. Clark County, Nevada. 7 8 CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 8. 9 The class that Plaintiff represents is defined in subclasses as follows: a) All current and former female employees of Defendants in the State of Nevada, who were and are subjected severe and pervasive sexual discrimination as a result of Defendants’ failure to investigate and their active coverup of allegations of sexual misconduct; b) All current and former female employees of Defendants in the State of Nevada, who were and are subjected to a sexually hostile work environment as a result of Defendants’ failure to prevent discrimination based upon sex (female); c) All current and former female employees employed by Defendants in the State of Nevada who were harmed or forced into servitude by Defendants’ failures to investigate and enforce policies of discrimination. d) All current and former female employees employed by Defendants in the State of Nevada who were harmed in their business and property as a result of Defendants’ racketeering activity. e) All current and former spa masseuses are forced to work off-the-clock in violation of minimum wage laws. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 All the facts and circumstances that give rise to the subject lawsuit occurred in 9. This action has been brought and may properly be maintained as a class action 23 pursuant to the provisions of Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure 23, because there is a well- 24 defined community of interest in the litigation and the proposed class is ascertainable: 25 A. NUMEROSITY: The plaintiff class is so numerous that the individual 26 joinder of all members is impractical under the circumstances of this case. 27 While the exact number of class members is unknown to plaintiffs at this 28 time, plaintiffs are informed and believe that many current and former 3 1 employees of defendant have been denied payment of overtime 2 compensation for their work during the period covered by this action; 3 B. COMMON QUESTIONS PREDOMINATE: Common questions of law 5 and fact exist as to all members of the plaintiff class and predominate over 6 any questions that affect only individual members of the class. 7 common questions of law and fact include, but are not limited to: 8 i. 9 entitling plaintiff class to damages; The Whether Defendants created a sexually hostile work environment 10 ii. 11 members in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1589 entitling plaintiff class to 12 damages; 13 iii. 14 in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c); 1962 (b); 1962(d) entitling plaintiff 15 class to damages; 16 iv. 17 class members entitling plaintiff class to damages; 18 v. 19 sexual harassment, assault and battery entitling plaintiff class to damages; 20 vi. 21 harassment, assault and battery was committed within the scope of his 22 employment; 23 vii. 24 knowledge of the sexually hostile environment and actively covered it up 25 entitling plaintiff class to damages; 26 viii. 27 Defendant Wynn; 28 Whether Defendants created forced sexual servitude upon class Whether Defendants harmed class members’ business and property Whether Defendants intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Whether Defendant Wynn engaged in a patter and practice of Whether Defendant Wynn’s pattern and practice of sexual Whether Defendant Resorts and Defendant Wynn Las Vegas had Whether Defendants negligently retained and/or supervised ... 4 1 ix. 2 for Defendant Wynn’s conduct under the doctrine of respondeat superior; 3 x. 5 entitling plaintiff class to damages; 6 C. Whether Defendants Resorts and Wynn Las Vegas are responsible Whether Defendants failed to pay overtime to class members TYPICALITY: Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the class 7 members. Plaintiffs and the members of the class sustained damages 8 arising out of defendants’ common practice of failing to pay overtime 9 compensation to employees. Plaintiff, like the other Class members, were 10 required to work over 8 hours per day, and over 40 hours per week during 11 the period covered by this action; 12 D. ADEQUACY: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of 13 the members of the class. Plaintiff has no interest that is adverse to the 14 interests of the other class members; 15 E. SUPERIORITY: A class action is superior to other available means for 16 the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy since individual 17 joinder of all members of the class is impractical; class action treatment 18 will permit a large number of similarly situated persons to prosecute their 19 common claims in a single forum simultaneously, efficiently, and without 20 the unnecessary duplication of effort and expense that numerous 21 individual actions would engender. Furthermore, as the damages suffered 22 by each individual member of the class may be relatively small, the 23 expenses and burden of individual litigation would make it difficult or 24 impossible for individual members of the class to redress the wrongs done 25 to them, while an important public interest will be served by addressing 26 the matter as a class action. The cost to the court system of adjudication 27 of such individualized litigation would also present the potential for 28 inconsistent or contradictory judgments; 5 1 F. PUBLIC POLICY CONSIDERATION: Employers throughout the state 2 violate do not enforce sexual harassment policies or investigate high level 3 executives within their corporate structure. Current employees are often 5 afraid to assert their rights out of fear of direct, or indirect retaliation. 6 Former employees are fearful of bringing actions because they perceive 7 their former employers can blacklist them in their future endeavors 8 through negative references. Class actions provide the class members who 9 are not named on the Complaint with a type of anonymity that allows for 10 vindication of their rights 11 FACTS 12 10. Defendant Wynn engaged in over a decade of sexual abuse, harassment and 13 misconduct while serving as Chief Executive Officer of Defendant Resorts and Defendant 14 Wynn Las Vegas. 15 11. 16 Defendants collectively engaged in over a decade of coverup to prevent the discovery and remedy Defendant Wynn’s sexual abuse, harassment and misconduct. 17 12. Defendants’ decades-long coverup of sexual abuse allegations created a culture 18 where employees were afraid to pursue complaints, believed that speaking up would be 19 pointless and result in their inability to work anywhere in Nevada again. 20 13. These efforts at secrecy made it exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, for 21 gaming regulators, government officials, Defendants supervisors, managers and human 22 resources personnel to detect sexual misconduct and to prevent said misconduct. 23 14. These efforts at secrecy also created an environment sexually hostile to females 24 that made them feel powerless, without a voice, and incapable of complaining to management, 25 administrative bodies or seeking employment elsewhere in Nevada. 26 15. Defendants’ coverup actions instilled an environment of fear and intimidation 27 that prevented Plaintiff and others similarly situated from filing formal complaints. 28 ... 6 1 16. In or around April of 2019, Defendant Resorts’ chief executive, Matthew 2 Maddox, admitted in a public disclosure that he felt “deeply remorseful. [Defendants’ female 3 employees] felt that they didn’t have a voice. That if [Defendants’ female employees] were to 5 speak up they could be retaliated against. Or if they did, it would not be investigated.” 6 7 8 9 10 17. Defendant Resorts’ chief executive, Matthew Maddox, further stated, “I am sorry that our company did not live up to its values.” NEVADA GAMING CONTROL BOARD DETAILED LEGAL ABUSES The Nevada Gaming Board alleged the following: 18. In 2005, a female employee (“Employee 1”) complained that Defendant Wynn 11 had sexually assaulted her; however, Michael Schorr (“Schorr”), Doreen Whennen 12 (“Whennen”), and Arte Nathan (“Nathan”) failed to initiate an investigation into the allegation 13 and later settled it confidentiality for $7.5 million through a separate legal entity funded 14 personally by Defendant Wynn. 15 19. In January 2012, at the latest, Kimmarie Sinatra (“Sinatra”), Senior Vice Present 16 for Defendant Resorts, learned of the 2005 settlement. By July 2017, at the latest, Sinatra 17 learned that Employee 1 had alleged that Defendant Wynn had raped her. 18 19 20 20. Defendants did not conduct a timely investigation into Employee 1’s rape allegations. 21. At least four (4) former executives of Defendant Resorts and Defendant Wynn, 21 failed to initiate and/or conduct an investigation after obtaining knowledge of allegations of 22 sexual misconduct against Defendant Wynn as required by Defendants’ policies and 23 procedures. 24 22. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 25 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 26 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 27 28 23. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described herein constituted a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 7 1 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 2 463.310(4)(d)(2). 3 24. Another female employee (“Employee 2”) alleged that Defendant Wynn 5 pressured her into a nonconsensual sexual relationship that lasted from 2005 through her 6 departure from Defendant Resorts in 2006. 7 8 25. Defendant Wynn entered into a private settlement with Employee 2’s allegations of sexual misconduct against Defendant Wynn in 2006. 9 26. Schorr, Nathan and Kevin Tourek (“Tourek”) all failed to initiate an 10 investigation into Employee 2’s allegations of sexual misconduct in violation of Defendants’ 11 policies and procedures. 12 27. At least three (3) former executives of Defendant Resorts failed to initiate or 13 conduct an investigation after obtaining knowledge of allegations of sexual misconduct against 14 Defendant Wynn as required by Defendants’ policies and procedures. 15 28. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 16 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 17 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 18 463.310(4)(d)(2). 19 29. 20 In 2014, Employee 3, a former Defendant Resorts employee (Employee 3) alleged that Defendant Wynn engaged in sexual misconduct against her in 2005. 21 30. Tourek and Defendant Wooden both failed to initiate an investigation into 22 Employee 3’s allegations of sexual misconduct in violation of Defendant Resorts’ policies and 23 procedures. 24 31. At least two (2) former executives of Defendant Resorts, failed to initiate and/or 25 conduct an investigation after obtaining knowledge of allegations of sexual misconduct against 26 Defendant Wynn as required by Defendants’ policies and procedures. 27 ... 28 ... 8 1 32. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 2 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 3 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 5 33. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 6 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 7 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 8 463.310(4)(d)(2). 9 34. Three other employees, Employee 4, Employee 5 and Employee 6, whom 10 worked at Defendant Resorts’ spa made allegations that Defendant Wynn had engaged in 11 sexual harassment during massages that were performed on him in 2014. 12 35. Employee 4, Employee 5, and Employee 6, reported some or all of the alleged 13 sexual harassment by Defendant Wynn to management, but no one in Defendants’ 14 management reported the allegations or otherwise ensured that the allegations had been 15 reported thereto, as would have been required by Defendants’ policies and procedures in effect 16 at the time, so an investigation could be conducted. 17 36. Several individuals, including managers and executives of Defendants, became 18 aware of some or all of the allegations of sexual harassment by Defendant Wynn made by 19 Employee 4, Employee 5 and Employee 6 but did not report the allegations or otherwise ensure 20 that the allegations had been reported thereto, as would have been required by Defendants’ 21 polices and procedures. 22 37. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 23 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 24 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 25 38. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 26 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 27 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 28 463.310(4)(d)(2). 9 1 39. Another one of Defendants’ employee, Employee 7, submitted written 2 correspondence to Defendant Wynn dated October 27, 2016, in which she made allegations 3 that Defendant Wynn engaged in sexual harassment with multiple flight attendants, which was 5 forwarded to Sinatra. 6 40. Sinatra, however, did not report the allegations, or otherwise ensure that the 7 allegations had been reported thereto, as would have been required by Defendants’ policies and 8 procedures. 9 41. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 10 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 11 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 12 42. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 13 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 14 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 15 463.310(4)(d)(2). 16 43. Multiple allegations were made that Defendants’ employee, Employee 8, had 17 facilitated sexual relationships between cocktail servers at Defendant Resorts and Defendant 18 Wynn and/or guests of Defendant Resorts. 19 44. Defendant Nathan, during his tenure at Defendant Resorts as Senior Vice 20 President and Chief Human Resource Officer, was aware of rumors that Employee 8 was 21 facilitating the sexual relationships referred to above. 22 45. Nathan, however, did not investigate the rumors, or otherwise ensure that the 23 rumors had been reported thereto, as would have been required by Defendants’ policies and 24 procedures. 25 46. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 26 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 27 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 28 ... 10 1 47. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 2 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 3 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 5 463.310(4)(d)(2). 6 48. 7 with cocktail servers.” 8 9 In 2007, Tourek, received an email alleging a former executive “loves sleeping 49. Tourek did not report this allegation or initiate and/or conduct an investigation after receiving the email. 10 50. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 11 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 12 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 13 51. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 14 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 15 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 16 463.310(4)(d)(2). 17 52. 18 compliance training were not applied to Defendant Wynn. 19 20 Defendants’ policies and procedures requiring employee attendance at annual 53. Defendants’ policies and procedures pertaining to Defendant Wynn spas were not applied to Mr. Wynn. 21 54. Defendants’ policies and procedures pertaining to conflicts of interest were not 22 followed for several settlements, including, but not limited to, the 2005 Settlement, and the 23 2006 settlement. 24 55. The ability of Defendants’ executives to operate outside of Company policies 25 and procedures contributed to the internal control breakdowns that occurred in relation to 26 allegations of misconduct as described in this complaint. 27 ... 28 ... 11 1 56. Defendants’ failures to initiate and/or conduct an investigation as described 2 herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming 3 Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 5.011(10). 5 57. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 6 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 7 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 8 463.310(4)(d)(2). 9 58. Defendants maintained a policy of personal relationships between employees 10 that “discouraged romantic or intimate relationships involving direct or indirect supervisory 11 relationship between employees regardless of whether the relationship is voluntary and/or 12 welcomed by both parties.” 13 59. Defendants maintained a policy for harassment and discrimination that stated 14 that “all employees are responsible for maintaining a professional work environment by 15 treating everyone with respect and by being aware of their own behavior toward others in the 16 workplace.” 17 60. Defendant Wynn, while Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief 18 Executive of Defendant Resorts, engaged in intimate and sexual conduct with Defendants’ 19 employees. 20 61. Defendant Wynn failed to comply with Defendants’ policies that he maintained 21 professional work environment and/or failed to comply with the spirit of Defendants’ polices 22 that discouraged intimate relationships between himself and employees. 23 62. Defendants’ failures described herein, in whole or in part, constitute violations 24 of NRS § 463.170(8) and/or Nevada Gaming Commission Regulations 5.010, 5011(1) and/or 25 5.011(10). 26 ... 27 ... 28 ... 12 1 63. Each separate occasion when Defendants failed to initiate and/or conduct an 2 investigation as described herein constitutes a separate violation of the Gaming Control Act 3 and Regulations of the Commission, as herein specified, for the purposes of NRS § 5 463.310(4)(d)(2). 6 64. Defendants did not enforce their policies and procedures with regard to their 7 executives and other high-level employees following the reporting procedures for sexual 8 harassment and related matters. 9 65. Defendants’ failures to enforce policies and procedures have led to multiple 10 instances, a number of which are set out in this Complaint, where sexual harassment 11 allegations concerning Defendants executives were not investigated. 12 66. Defendants’ failures to enforce its policies and procedures have led to multiple 13 instances where allegations of sexual harassment by executives of Defendants were not 14 appropriately addressed by Defendants. 15 16 67. Angela Saxton, a former spa attendant, said that an executive warned her against complaining about an alleged sexual assault by Defendant Wynn. 17 PLAINTIFF SCHRADER 18 68. Plaintiff did exhaust her administrative remedies and obtain a right to sue letter. 19 69. In or around December of 2012, Plaintiff was tasked to perform a massage on 20 Defendant Wynn. 21 70. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 When Plaintiff walked into the massage room, Defendant Wynn laid atop of the massage table completely exposed. 71. After massaging Defendant Wynn for a few minutes, Defendant Wynn ordered Plaintiff to perform oral sex on him. 72. Fearing for her safety and her financial future, Plaintiff complied; afterwards, she felt violated, broken and humiliated. 73. Plaintiff wanted to complain but was terrified of Defendant Wynn’s power and status in Las Vegas. 13 1 2 74. Plaintiff had been told to never say “no” to or speak negatively about Defendant 75. Plaintiff tried to complain to a manager that Defendant Wynn had done horrible Wynn. 3 5 things to her; however, the manager told her sternly: “We don’t say anything negative about 6 Steve Wynn.” 7 8 76. Defendant Wynn had his assistant, Laurie, call Plaintiff to go to Defendant Wynn’s office. 9 10 On or around June 23, 2015, while out celebrating her friend’s birthday, 77. Plaintiff immediately left her friend’s birthday celebration and went to Mr. Wynn’s office. 11 78. Defendant Wynn then ordered Plaintiff to perform a sexual act on him. 12 79. After complying with Defendant Wynn’s orders, he told Plaintiff to leave. 13 80. Plaintiff returned to her friend’s birthday celebration emotionally destroyed. 14 81. From 2012 until 2016, Defendant Wynn forced Ms. Schrader to perform oral 15 sex on many occasions. 16 82. From 2012 until 2019, Plaintiff attempted to report or complain about the sexual 17 hostile environment and the sexual prisonlike atmosphere that existed and permeated her 18 employment. 19 83. Through a decade-long campaign of exacting silence, Defendants conditioned 20 employees that saying “no” or challenging Defendant Wynn was not an option and sexual 21 servitude was their only choice. 22 23 84. to VIP clients under any circumstances. 24 25 Defendants also told female employees that they were not allowed to say “no” 85. Due to Defendants’ well-established power throughout Nevada, Plaintiff felt vulnerable and without viable options to ever leave her employ. 26 86. Defendant Resorts’ managers always told Plaintiff to be available for Defendant 27 Wynn and VIP clients upon a moment’s notice. 28 ... 14 1 2 87. In addition, memorandums are often posted in support of Defendant Wynn and asserting that allegations of wrongdoing are false. 3 88. On January 26, 2018, Defendant Wooden posted a letter addressed to all 5 employees that allegations of sexual wrongdoing directed at Defendant Wynn were Elaine 6 Wynn’s latest litigation strategy since 2011. The letter said in pertinent part: “We are all supportive of Mr. Wynn and his leadership, and while it is unfortunate that the news media has been used to assail Mr. Wynn and us in this way, we are doing everything we can to protect our employees from these attacks and publicity.” 7 8 9 10 11 89. Wynn’s sexual misconduct and decades of coverups. 12 13 The letter was false because Defendants had ample knowledge of Defendant 90. Furthermore, gaming investigations and articles detailing Defendant Wynn’s sexual misconduct have permeated Defendant Resorts’ workplace. 14 91. Defendant Resorts has always defended and covered up for Defendant Wynn 15 and discouraged speaking out against him, which Wynn Rosorts’ Matthew Maddox admitted in 16 or around April of 2019. 17 92. The individual Defendants all conspired and worked together to create a sexual 18 prisonlike atmosphere to prevent female employees from leaving, reporting or taking part in 19 investigations. 20 93. Currently, Defendant Resorts continues to outwardly support Defendant Wynn 21 through memorandums and its employees, which is calculated to deter female employees from 22 cooperating or liberating themselves from forced sexual servitude and a sexually hostile 23 environment. 24 94. After years of coercion, compelled silence, Plaintiff made a decision to 25 complain to Defendant Resorts’ human resources that Defendants’ employees refer to 26 Defendant Wynn’s female victims as “prostitutes.” 27 28 95. Defendants have shown little interest in preventing this from happening in the future. 15 1 2 96. female victims and employees. 3 5 97. 98. 10 99. Plaintiff complained directly to a spa manager Ambre about the terrible environment continually created by Defendant Resorts by publicly supporting Defendant Wynn regardless of the accusations. 11 12 Thereafter Plaintiff was subjected to comments from coworkers defending Defendant Wynn and calling her and other victims “prostitutes.” 8 9 In or around April 5, 2019, Defendant Resorts posted a memorandum related to the Massachusetts’ gaming board’s investigation. 6 7 Defendants created and continue to create a sexually hostile atmosphere toward 100. Plaintiff told Ambre that Defendants were torturing her and others by continually engendering hostile treatment of Defendant Wynn’s victims. 13 101. Defendant Resorts’ attitude towards Plaintiff has been and continues to be that 14 she brought this hostile treatment upon herself by discussing Defendant Wynn’s treatment of 15 her. 16 17 102. permeates workplace atmosphere to this day. 18 19 Defendants appear to blame victims for the discriminatory environment that 103. Defendants continue to allow the abuse of Plaintiff as their employee continue to mentally abuse and call Plaintiff and other female victims prostitutes and sluts. 20 CONTINUING VIOLATIONS DOCTRINE AND EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL 21 104. The power Defendants wielded – and their ability to conceal evidence, silence 22 employees, and prevent them from complaining about Wynn’s sexual predatory behavior and 23 the overall sexually hostile environment – has been documented by both the Nevada and 24 Massachusetts gaming commissions. 25 105. As stated supra, Defendants failed to investigate or follow procedures or state 26 laws when receiving credible accusations of sexual assault, misconduct and overall sexual 27 harassment. 28 ... 16 1 106. Defendants’ active abuse of the legal processes and ongoing campaign to 2 prevent employees from reporting sexually discriminating conduct and from filing claims with 3 administrative agencies, law enforcement or other investigative bodies created ongoing hostile 5 environment towards females that entitles Plaintiff and plaintiff class to invoke the continuing 6 violations doctrine. 7 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Discrimination in violation of Title VII and NRS §608.017) (Against All Defendants) 8 9 10 11 107. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference as though set forth in full herein paragraphs 1 through 106 above. 12 108. Defendants failed to initiate any investigations into Defendant Wynn’s sexual 13 abuses and the sexually hostile environment and instead covered them up to ensure secrecy, a 14 culture of silence and to create a sexual prisonlike atmosphere. 15 16 109. This resulted in a failure to maintain the workplace free of from sexual discrimination. 17 110. Defendants’ failures to investigate, follow its procedures and continued 18 companywide coverups for Defendant Wynn created and continues to create a sexually hostile 19 work environment that continues to this day. 20 111. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ failures, coverups and 21 discrimination, Plaintiff and plaintiff class have sustained injuries and are entitled to recover 22 compensatory and punitive damages, plus attorneys’ fees and costs. 23 24 112. As a direct and proximate result of these violations, plaintiff and plaintiff class have been damaged in an amount in excess of $15,000.00. 25 113. As a direct and proximate result of these violations, Plaintiff and plaintiff class 26 members are entitled to damages pursuant to statute, attorney fees and costs. 27 ... 28 ... 17 1 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of 18 U.S.C § 1589) (Against Defendants Wynn, Resorts, Wynn Las Vegas) 2 3 5 6 114. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 113 of the Complaint as though said paragraphs were fully set forth herein. 7 115. Defendants are “persons” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §1589 et. seq. 8 116. Defendant Wynn forced Plaintiff and plaintiff class members to perform sexual 9 services upon demand. 10 11 117. Defendants forced Plaintiff and plaintiff class members into sexual labor by means serious harm, and threats of serious harm to that person. 12 118. As described above, Defendants created an atmosphere through abuse of the 13 legal process or by means of a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause Plaintiff to believe 14 that, if that they did not perform such labor or services, they would suffer serious harm. 15 119. Defendants’ conduct, power and ability to blacklist employees throughout 16 Nevada made Plaintiff and plaintiff class members vulnerable to forced servitude and sexual 17 labor. 18 19 20 21 120. As a direct and proximate result of these violations, Plaintiff and plaintiff class members have been damaged in an amount in excess of $15,000.00. 121. As a direct and proximate result of these violations, Plaintiff and plaintiff class members are entitled to damages pursuant to statute, attorney fees and costs. 22 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of 18 USC §§ 1962(c), (b), (d) (Federal RICO) (Against All Defendants) 23 24 25 26 27 28 122. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 121 of the Complaint as though said paragraphs were fully set forth herein. 123. Defendant Wynn’s predatory behavior followed a pattern designed for his personal sexual gratification at the expense of Plaintiff and the plaintiff class. 18 1 124. Wielding unfettered power in Las Vegas, Defendant Wynn’s modus operendi 2 was to use Defendants’ employees as sexual slaves. Defendant Wynn has forced and coerced 3 sexual acts by Plaintiff and other employees, which constituted rape and sexual assault. 5 6 7 8 9 125. Defendant Wynn and Defendant Wooden are “persons” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §1961(3) who conducted affairs within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). 126. Sinatra, Tourek, Schorr, Whennen, Nathan, Defendant Wooden and Defendant Wynn comprised the Wynn Sexual Enterprise. 127. The Wynn Sexual Enterprise is an association-in-fact within the meaning of 18 10 U.S.C. § 1961(4) consisting of (i) Defendants, including their employees and agents; (ii) 11 Defendants’ executives; (iii) and other unnamed co-conspirators as set forth supra. The 12 Defendant “persons” are distinct from the Wynn Sexual Enterprise. 13 128. Wynn Sexual Enterprise’s common purpose included but was not limited to 14 creating sexual slaves in violation of 18 USC §1589 and to facilitate sexual assault, battery, 15 harassment and misconduct. 16 129. Wynn Sexual Enterprise’s common purpose was to destroy and conceal 17 documents, or other evidence and intimidate employees to prevent use of such evidence to 18 report, prosecute, and/or publicize Defendant Wynn’s sexual offenses, including, but not 19 limited to, the execution of non-disclosure agreements intended to cover up, squelch and 20 maintain secrecy around Defendant Wynn’s offenses, with threat of legal proceedings or 21 financial duress if the victims were to disclose their experiences. 22 23 24 130. Each member of the Enterprise played a role in directing and participating in the Wynn Sexual Enterprise. 131. The complicit executives each allowed Defendant Wynn’s conduct to go 25 unreported and/or scrutinized and agreed to conceal it so that they could continue to benefit 26 from their lucrative positions. 27 28 132. The co-conspirators provided cover and shield to the Wynn Sexual Enterprise by protecting misconduct. 19 1 133. The Wynn Sexual Enterprise falls within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4) 2 and consists of a group of “persons” associated together for the common purpose of: (1) 3 harassing, threatening, misleading, covering up, preventing reporting, disclosure, or 5 prosecution of sexual misconduct, and destroying, mutilating, or concealing records, 6 documents, or other evidence to prevent the use of such evidence to report or prosecute sexual 7 offenses. 8 134. Defendants have conducted and participated in the affairs of the Wynn Sexual 9 Enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §§ 10 1961(1) and 1961(5), which includes multiple instances of forced labor, tampering with 11 witnesses or victim in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512, and multiple instances of obtaining a 12 victim for the purpose of committing or attempting to commit aggravated sexual abuse in 13 violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1590 and 1591 as described above. 14 135. The Defendants also communicated by U.S. Mail, by interstate facsimile, and 15 by interstate email with various affiliates, divisions, government agencies and other third 16 parties in furtherance of the scheme. By utilizing the US mail and wires to commit acts 17 identified by the Nevada Gaming Commission, Defendants violated Title 18 USC § 1341, mail 18 fraud and Title 18 USC § 1343, wire fraud. The mail and wire transmissions described herein 19 were made in furtherance of Defendants’ scheme and common course of conduct to deceive 20 the public and government agencies about Defendant Wynn’s sexual conduct. 21 22 136. Defendants exerted control over the Wynn Sexual Enterprise, and Defendants participated in the operation or management of the affairs of the Wynn Sexual Enterprise. 23 137. Within the Wynn Sexual Enterprise, there was a common communication 24 network by which co-conspirators shared information on a regular basis; and used this 25 common communication network for the purpose of enabling Defendant Wynn’s sexual 26 activities. 27 ... 28 ... 20 1 138. The Defendants and co-conspirators used the mail and wires for the 2 transmission, delivery or shipment of the following that were foreseeably caused to be sent as a 3 result of the Defendants’ illegal scheme: 5 a. Agreements to payoff participants and victims; 6 b. False information to Nevada State agencies and Nevada State Gaming 7 8 9 Commission; c. Wires and mails between Defendants agents and representatives. 139. As described by two state gaming commissions, Defendants utilized the 10 interstate and mail and wires for the purposes of obtaining money or property by means of the 11 omissions, false pretenses, and misrepresentations described therein. 12 13 14 140. As described supra, Defendants and the Wynn Sexual Enterprise did engage in activities that affected interstate commerce. 141. Defendants’ scheme and the above described racketeering activities amounted 15 to a common course of conduct intended to cause Plaintiff and plaintiff class and others to hide 16 and conceal Defendant Wynn’s conduct. Each such racketeering activity was related, had 17 similar purposes, involved the same or similar participants and methods of commission, and 18 had similar results affecting similar victims, including Plaintiff and plaintiff class. Defendants’ 19 fraudulent activities are part of their ongoing business and constitute a continuing threat to 20 Plaintiff’s and plaintiff class’ business and/or property. 21 142. The pattern of racketeering activity alleged herein and Defendant Wynn are 22 separate and distinct from each other. Defendants engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity 23 alleged herein for the purpose of conducting the affairs of the Wynn Sexual Enterprise. 24 143. The Wynn Sexual Enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity by 25 allowing Defendant Wynn to utilize employees as a stable of sexual slaves and to commit 26 sexual assault, battery and overall sexual misconduct. Wynn Sexual Enterprise’s common 27 purpose was to conceal evidence and mislead Plaintiff, plaintiff class and government agencies 28 21 1 to prevent victims from reporting, prosecuting, or disclosing Defendant Wynn’s sexual 2 misconduct, Defendants’ sexually hostility and sexual trafficking. 3 5 144. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violations, Plaintiff’s and plaintiff class’ business and property has been damaged. 6 145. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violations, Plaintiff and the 7 plaintiff class have lost wages, business opportunities, income and retirement monies have 8 been significantly reduced. 9 146. 10 $15,000.00. 11 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Against Defendant Wynn, Defendant Wooden, Defendant Resorts, Defendant Wynn Las Vegas) 12 13 14 15 147. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 146 of the Complaint as though said paragraphs were fully set forth herein. 16 17 Plaintiff and the plaintiff class have been damaged in an amount in excess of 148. Sinatra, Tourek, Schorr, Whennen, Nathan, Defendant Wooden and Defendant Wynn intended to and did intend to inflict severe emotional distress upon Ms. Schrader. 18 149. Defendant Wynn’s assault and battery were intentional. 19 150. Defendants’ concealment and failure to prevent Defendant Wynn’s sexual 20 misconduct, sexual assaults, sexual harassment, and sexual discrimination was intentional. 21 151. Defendants intended to inflict emotional distress upon Plaintiff. 22 152. Defendants’ conduct was extreme and outrageous. 23 153. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ intentional acts, Plaintiff have 24 been damaged in an amount in excess of $10,000.00. 25 ... 26 ... 27 ... 28 22 1 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Conspiracy (Against Defendant Wynn and Defendant Wooden) 2 3 154. 5 6 Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 153 of the Complaint as though said paragraphs were fully set forth herein. 155. 7 Sinatra, Tourek, Schorr, Whennen, Nathan, Defendant Wooden and Defendants 8 Wynn, intended to and did conspire to conceal sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, sexual 9 assault and sexual discrimination with the intent to harm Plaintiff and the plaintiff class. 156. 10 By concealing, hiding and manipulating legal proceedings, Defedant Wynn and 11 Defendant Wooden created a sexually hostile work environment, inflicted emotional distress 12 and mental anguish and caused harm to Plaintiff and plaintiff class. 157. 13 14 As a direct and proximate result this conspiracy, Plaintiff and plaintiff class has suffered damages in an amount in excess of $15,000. 15 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Against Defendant Resorts) 16 17 158. 18 19 paragraphs were fully set forth herein. 159. 20 21 Plaintiff and the plaintiff class are non-exempt employees and are entitled to the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act. 160. 22 23 Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 157 of the Complaint as though said In violation of 29 U.S.C. § 206, Defendant Resorts required Plaintiff and the plaintiff class to perform work off-the-clock without pay on a weekly basis. 161. 24 Defendant Resorts failed to pay numerous persons who are similarly situated to 25 the individually named Plaintiff, Brenna Schrader, for work and labor such others similarly 26 situated performed for Defendant Resorts. 27 ... 28 ... 23 1 162. In violation of the FLSA, Defendant Resorts has knowingly and willfully 2 refused to perform its obligations to compensate Plaintiff and plaintiff class for all wages 3 earned and all hours worked. 5 163. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff and plaintiff class have suffered and 6 continue to suffer substantial losses related to the use and enjoyment of such wages, lost 7 interest on such wages, and expenses and attorney fees in seeking to compel Defendant Resorts 8 to fully perform its obligations under federal law, all to their respective damages in amounts 9 according to proof at the time of trial, and within the jurisdiction of the Court. 10 164. Defendant Resorts violated the FLSA knowingly and willfully, with the 11 wrongful and deliberate intention of injuring Plaintiff and plaintiff class, from improper 12 motives amounting to malice, and in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s and plaintiff class’ 13 rights. 14 165. Plaintiff and plaintiff class are entitled to recover nominal, actual, compensatory 15 and liquidated damages in amounts according to proof at the time of trial, within the 16 jurisdiction of the Court. 17 166. Plaintiff and plaintiff class are entitled to recover unpaid balances of wages 18 earned, plus interest, penalties, attorney fees, expenses and costs of suit. 19 ... 20 ... 21 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 24 1 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff pray judgment of this Court as follows: 2 1. General damages in an amount in excess of $15,000.00; 3 2. Special damages in an amount in excess of $15,000.00; 5 3. Punitive damages; 6 4. Treble Damages; 7 5. Attorney fees and cost of suit; and 8 6. For such other relief as is just and proper. 9 DATED this 26th day of September 2019 10 RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM 11 12 13 14 15 16 /s/ Burke Huber ________________________ BURKE HUBER ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10902 801 S. 4th Street Las Vegas, NV 89101 Attorneys for Plaintiff 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 25