20STCV32031 Assigned for all purposes to: Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Judicial Officer: Robert Broadbelt Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 08/21/2020 04:39 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by M. Barel,Deputy Clerk 1 2 3 4 MEHTANI LAW OFFICES AANAND MEHTANI (SBN 254556) 1000 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 600 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: 213-291-6900 Facsimile: 213-260-6121 amehtani@mehtanilaw.com 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Julia CrowleyFarenga 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 JULIA CROWLEYFARENGA, an individual, Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Plaintiff, vs. SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES, CORP. a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants. 1. DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING ACT (“FEHA”) – GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12940 et seq.; and 2. RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA; and 3. FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION & RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA [DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 2 Plaintiff Julia CrowleyFarenga (“Plaintiff” or “CrowleyFarenga”) alleges as follows on knowledge as to herself and her known acts, and on information and belief as to all other matters: 3 I. 4 PARTIES 5 1. At the relevant times mentioned herein, Plaintiff was jointly employed by Defendant 6 Space Exploration Technologies, Corp. (“Defendant,” the “Company” or “Defendants” (with DOES)). 7 The unlawful conduct alleged herein occurred in Los Angeles County. 8 9 10 2. At the relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant was a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business in Los Angeles County. 3. At the relevant times mentioned herein, Defendant was an “employer” of Plaintiff as such 11 term is defined by California Government Code section 12926(d) in that they regularly employed five 12 (5) or more persons such that it was at all times subject to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (the 13 “FEHA”). 14 4. At all material times mentioned herein, Defendants and each DOE defendant was an 15 agent, employee and/or partner of the remaining Defendant, including the DOE Defendant, and, in doing 16 the things alleged herein, was acting within the scope of such agency, employment and/or partnership 17 with the permission, authority and/or consent of his, her or its co-Defendant. 18 5. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants acted in concert, and/or as alter egos of each 19 other, or otherwise are jointly liable for the unlawful conduct complained of herein. Indeed, Defendants 20 handle certain aspects of their employer-employee relationships jointly and are a single employer, joint 21 employer and/or integrated enterprise. Defendants at the relevant times were a single employer, joint 22 employer and/or an integrated enterprise employing Plaintiff. 23 6. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of defendants sued herein as DOES 24 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sue these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend 25 this Complaint to allege the true names and capacities of said defendants when the same has been 26 ascertained. Each of the fictitiously named defendants is responsible in some manner for the acts 27 complained of herein. Unless otherwise stated, all references to named defendants shall include DOE 28 -2COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 defendants as well. 2 II. 3 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4 7. Jurisdiction and venue are proper in this Court because all of the claims alleged herein 5 arose substantially in Los Angeles County and all of the defendants are doing or did business or reside 6 in Los Angeles County, and/or their principal place of business is in Los Angeles County, in each case, 7 at the times relevant herein. See also Govt. Code § 12965(b). 8 9 8. The amount in controversy in this matter exceeds the jurisdictional limits of this Court, exclusive of interest and costs. 10 III. 11 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 12 9. CrowleyFarenga started working for the Company as a summer intern while in college in 13 or around June 2015. She worked for the Company again during the 2016 and 2017 summers. During 14 each of her summers, she worked for the propulsion department with manager Erik Palitsch. 15 16 17 10. During her third summer, in or around June 2017, CrowleyFarenga complained to the human resources department that Palitsch was subjecting her to gender/sexual harassment. 11. CrowleyFarenga told the human resources professional that spoke to her that Palitsch was 18 coercing her to meet with him for 1.5 to 2 hours for “one on-one-manager meetings.” That is, the 19 meetings would be scheduled for 30 minutes, but he would continue then for up to two hours without 20 any legitimate need. She also explained at that meeting or a later date that his other interns over the 21 years, who were all male, met with him for no more than 30 minutes for these meetings. She further 22 explained that Palitsch would almost entirely talk about non-work-related topics during their meetings. 23 12. CrowleyFarenga further told the human resources professional that Palitsch had told her 24 that she “talks to men too much.” She also told HR that he told her that she was a “social butterfly,” 25 that she was “never at [her] desk,” and that she was “always at the coffee cart and froyo stand.” The 26 general idea that CrowleyFarenga articulated was that Palitsch wanted her to refrain from talking to men 27 at the Company as much as possible. Indeed, it even seemed to her that he wanted her to refrain even 28 -3COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 when it was necessary for work. In other words, it appeared to her that he was acting possessive and 2 jealous. 3 13. CrowleyFarenga also told HR that Palitsch had told her, “you are unique, I could spend 4 the rest of my life trying to figure you out,” and that she felt very uncomfortable with her manager 5 making such a comment without any indication from her that it may be invited. 6 14. CrowleyFarenga also told HR that once when Palitsch saw her talk to a man that he did 7 not recognize, Palitsch asked “was that your boyfriend?” and he further stated “be careful who you are 8 seen talking to, people may get the wrong impression about why you are here.” 9 15. CrowleyFarenga also told HR that Palitsch told her that he wished he was out with her 10 during a meeting – specifically, he said “wouldn’t this [meeting] be better if we were at Harry Potter 11 World” or similar words. In context, he was saying that he wanted to go Harry Potter World with her 12 and only her. 13 16. Generally, CrowleyFarenga painted a picture of protracted gender and/or sexual 14 harassment towards her. She told HR that Palitsch was controlling towards her and only her, and that 15 he made several unwelcome advances towards her, and only would become more even controlling when 16 she did not reciprocate. 17 17. After the meeting with HR, CrowleyFarenga met with Will Heltsley, the Vice President 18 of Propulsion to tell him about the gender and sexual harassment detailed above. In that meeting, 19 Heltsley told her that he believed that there is “some problematic behavior happening” and that he was 20 going to talk to Palitsch’s male intern to find out if “this is happening because Erik is Erik or because 21 you are you.” 22 23 24 18. At that meeting, Heltsley offered to transfer CrowleyFarenga to a different team, and CrowleyFarenga accepted as she felt that she had no choice but to accept or work with Palitsch. 19. After five performance reviews that indicated CrowleyFarenga met expectations, her 25 sixth and last performance review at the Company in August 2017 was negative. Though she received 26 a negative review, she had frequently asked for feedback during the term of her internship and she had 27 been told that she was doing fine. 28 -4COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 20. When the extern term ended, CrowleyFarenga was not extended an offer to return to the 2 Company upon graduation from her master’s degree program, which would been complete in the 3 subsequent academic year. At that time, CrowleyFarenga’s new manager, Ron Bates, told her that she 4 is not getting an offer because there are insufficient open positions, but that she should check in with 5 him in the fall about a potential job. 6 7 8 21. Later, in or around January 2018, Heltsley told CrowleyFarenga that she was not getting an offer because of low performance, but that she was still eligible for rehire. 22. In or around January 2018, CrowleyFarenga was interviewing with the Customer 9 Operations & Integration Department (it may have had a different formal name) at the Company for a 10 job after graduation. She was told by Damaris Toepel, who was a lead engineer in the department, that 11 CrowleyFarenga was very well liked by those who interviewed her, and that there was “no indication” 12 that she would not get the job. CrowleyFarenga was also told by her recruiter that she would get the 13 job pending a rubber stamp from certain executives at the Company. CrowleyFarenga was not extended 14 an offer for that position. She was told that the Company wanted someone with more experience. But 15 she later learned that Heltsley had stopped her from being hired. 16 23. CrowleyFarenga’s gender and her complaints about gender and sex harassment were 17 substantial motivating factors in the failure of the Company to hire her on fulltime or on an indefinite 18 basis after her master’s program was complete. 19 24. The misconduct, as described above, was performed or ratified by managing agents of 20 the Company, including, but not limited to Palitsch, Heltsley, Bates, and Toepel (collectively, the 21 “Managing Agents”). The Managing Agents were each responsible for overseeing a substantial portion 22 of the companies’ business operations, and each exercised substantial discretionary authority over vital 23 aspects of such operations including without limitation the investigation of sexual harassment 24 complaints. The Managing Agents engaged in malicious and oppressive conduct that justifies an award 25 of punitive damages. 26 27 25. In committing the foregoing acts as set forth above, the Managing Agents willfully disregarded Plaintiff’s right to be free from unlawful discrimination and retaliation. 28 -5COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 26. In committing the foregoing acts as set forth above, the Managing Agents acted 2 despicably and subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard for Plaintiff’s rights 3 under California law. The Managing Agents’ conduct demonstrates a callous indifference for the law 4 and Plaintiff’s rights. 5 27. In committing the foregoing acts as set forth above, the Managing Agents intended to 6 cause emotional and financial injury to Plaintiff. Specifically, the Managing Agents have engaged in a 7 campaign of discrimination and retaliation with the intent to cause severe emotional distress or at least 8 without regard for the consequences on Plaintiff’s career, livelihood, and emotional wellbeing. 9 IV. 10 EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES 11 28. On August 29, 2019, the Department of Fair Employment & Housing (“DFEH”). issued 12 a “right to sue” letter covering all of Plaintiff’s claims brought under the FEHA herein. Defendant was 13 served with such letter directly by the DFEH. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit 14 have been fulfilled. This action is filed within one year of the date that the DFEH issued its right to sue 15 letter. 16 V. 17 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 18 (Discrimination in Violation of FEHA) 19 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against All Defendants) 20 21 22 29. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-28, inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 30. California Government Code section 12940, et seq. makes it unlawful to subject an 23 employee to an adverse employment action on account her gender. 24 Plaintiff on the basis of her sex and gender, through numerous illegal acts, including, without limitation, 25 transferring her and failing to hire her. Defendants had animus towards Plaintiff and the aforementioned 26 protected characteristics. Defendants discriminated against 27 28 -6COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 31. As a proximate result of the conduct of Defendants, Plaintiff suffered and continues to 2 suffer damages in terms of lost wages, lost bonuses, lost benefits, and other pecuniary loss according to 3 proof. Plaintiff has also suffered and will continue to suffer physical and emotional injuries, including 4 nervousness, humiliation, depression, anguish, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, fatigue, 5 and anxiety. The amount of Plaintiff’s damages will be ascertained at trial. 6 32. The act of oppression, fraud, and/or malice were engaged in by employees and Managing 7 Agents of Defendants. Defendants had advance knowledge of the unfitness of each employee and/or 8 agent who acted with oppression, fraud, and/or malice, and/or authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct 9 for which an award of punitive damages is sought, and/or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, 10 and/or malice. The advance knowledge and conscious disregard, authorization, ratification, or act of 11 oppression, fraud, and/or malice was committed by or on part of an officer, director, or managing agent 12 of Defendants, thereby entitling Plaintiff to punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in 13 accordance with California Civil Code section 3294 in a sum appropriate to punish and make an example 14 out of Defendants. 15 33. FEHA provides for an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by a 16 prevailing plaintiff in an action brought under its provisions. Plaintiff has employed and will continue 17 to employ attorneys for the initiation and prosecution of this action. Plaintiff has incurred and will 18 continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs herein. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and 19 costs. 20 21 34. Plaintiff has been generally damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 22 VI. 23 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 24 (Retaliation in Violation of FEHA) 25 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against All Defendants) 26 27 35. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references paragraphs 1-34, inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 28 -7COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 36. California Government Code section 12940(h) makes it an unlawful employment practice 2 for an employer to “discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against any person because the person 3 has opposed any practices forbidden under [the FEHA] or because the person has filed a complaint, 4 testified, or assisted in any proceeding under [the FEHA].” 5 37. Defendants retaliated against Plaintiff for making complaints about discrimination and 6 harassment on the basis of sex and gender. Specifically, Defendants subjected Plaintiff to retaliatory 7 adverse employment actions by transferring her and failing to hire her, without limitation. 8 38. As a proximate result of the conduct of Defendants, Plaintiff suffered and continues to 9 suffer damages in terms of lost wages, lost bonuses, lost benefits, and other pecuniary loss according to 10 proof. Plaintiff has also suffered and will continue to suffer physical and emotional injuries, including 11 nervousness, humiliation, depression, anguish, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, fatigue, 12 and anxiety. The amount of Plaintiff’s damages will be ascertained at trial. 13 39. The act of oppression, fraud, and/or malice were engaged in by employees and Managing 14 Agents of Defendants. Defendants had advance knowledge of the unfitness of each employee and/or 15 agent who acted with oppression, fraud, and/or malice, and/or authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct 16 for which an award of punitive damages is sought, and/or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, 17 and/or malice. The advance knowledge and conscious disregard, authorization, ratification, or act of 18 oppression, fraud, and/or malice was committed by or on part of an officer, director, or managing agent 19 of Defendants, thereby entitling Plaintiff to punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in 20 accordance with California Civil Code section 3294 in a sum appropriate to punish and make an example 21 out of Defendants. 22 40. FEHA provides for an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by a 23 prevailing plaintiff in an action brought under its provisions. Plaintiff has employed and will continue 24 to employ attorneys for the initiation and prosecution of this action. Plaintiff has incurred and will 25 continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs herein. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and 26 costs. 27 41. Plaintiff has been generally damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this 28 -8COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 Court. 2 VII. 3 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 4 (Failure to Prevent Discrimination and Retaliation in Violation of the FEHA) 5 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants) 6 7 42. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-41, inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 8 43. California Government Code section 12940(k) makes it an unlawful employment practice 9 for an employer to “fail to take all reasonable steps to prevent discrimination and harassment from 10 occurring.” This provision also makes it unlawful for an employer to fail to prevent retaliation. See, 11 e.g., Ortiz v. Georgia Pacific (E.D. Cal. 2013) 973 F.Supp.2d 1162, 1184 (citing Taylor v. City of Los 12 Angeles Dep’t of Water & Power (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1216, 1240). 13 44. Defendants violated this provision by failing to prevent discrimination and retaliation 14 against Plaintiff. Specifically, Defendants knew or should have known of the discrimination and 15 retaliation against Plaintiff yet failed to take any prompt remedial action or other adequate measures and 16 failed to prevent not only her hostile work environment but also the various other adverse employment 17 actions such as forced transfer and failure to hire. 18 45. As a proximate result of the entity Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff suffered and will 19 continue to suffer physical and emotional injuries, including nervousness, humiliation, depression, 20 anguish, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort, fatigue, and anxiety. The amount of Plaintiff’s 21 damages will be ascertained at trial. 22 46. The FEHA provides for an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by a 23 prevailing plaintiff in an action brought under its provisions. Plaintiff has employed and will continue 24 to employ attorneys for the initiation and prosecution of this action. Plaintiff has incurred and will 25 continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs herein. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and 26 costs. 27 47. Plaintiff has been generally damaged in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this 28 -9COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 Court. 2 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 3 4 1. cause of action for which such damages are available. 5 6 2. For special damages, according to proof on each cause of action for which such damages are available. 7 8 For general damages, including emotional distress damages, according to proof on each 3. For compensatory damages, including emotional distress damages, according to proof on each cause of action for which such damages are available. 9 4. For declaratory and injunctive relief, as appropriate. 10 5. For punitive damages, as appropriate. 11 6. For pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest according to law. 12 7. For reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in this action pursuant to the FEHA and California 13 Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5. 14 8. For costs of suit incurred in this action. 15 9. For such other and further relief and the Court deems proper and just. 16 Dated: August 21, 2020 MEHTANI LAW OFFICES 17 By: 18 19 AANAND MEHTANI Attorneys for Plaintiff Julia CrowleyFarenga 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 10 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices 1 2 3 4 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff Julia CrowleyFarenga hereby demands a trial by jury on all causes of action alleged herein in the Complaint for Damages. Dated: August 21, 2019 MEHTANI LAW OFFICES 5 6 7 8 By: AANAND MEHTANI Attorneys for Plaintiff Julia CrowleyFarenga 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 11 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Mehtani Law Offices