E SAN FRl1ØWCO ~ll~N 2845 · Case 3:08-cv-02845-WHA Document 1 Filed 06/06/2008 Page 1 of 47. 1 true and correct copy of the Summons and Complaint filed by Plaintiff is attached

/

1 HANSON BRIDGETT LLPDIANE MARIE O'MALLEY -139166

2 domalley~hansonbridgett.comJAHMAL T. DAVIS -191504

3 jdavis~hansonbridgett.com425 Market Street, 26th Floor

4 San Francisco, CA94105Telephone: (415) 777-3200

5 Facsimile: (415) 541-9366

6 Attorneys for DefendantGOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND

7 TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

6200B

RJsi~l\~RD W. WIEK'N_i.,;-.f!Y:, u.s D'~!Ti~iCT COUR

NOH I HEHN DISTRiCT OF CAL/FO N/A

8

9

10

11

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRl1ØWCO ~ll~N'" 'V v C)

No. -

E

2845DOUGLAS ALARID,

Plaintiff, NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF ACTION TOFEDERAL COURT13 v.

14 GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAYAND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT;

15 MICHAEL LOCATI; DAVID RIVERA;KAY WITT, and DOES 1 through 50,

16 inclusive,

17 Defendants.18

19 TO THE CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

20 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA:

21 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendant GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY

22 AND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (hereinafter "Defendant" hereby removes to this

23 Court, on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, the state court action described

24 below:

25 1. State Court Action: On March 28, 2008, Plaintiff DOUGLAS ALARID

26 (hereinafter "Plaintiff') commenced this action in the Superior Court for the State of

27 California, in and for the County of San Francisco, e'ntitled Douglas Alarid v. Golden

28 Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District, et al. , Case No. CGC-08-473761. A

- 1 -

NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF ACTION TO FEDERAL COURT 1468441.1

c

Case 3:08-cv-02845-WHA Document 1 Filed 06/06/2008 Page 1 of 47

1 true and correct copy of the Summons and Complaint filed by Plaintiff is attached hereto

2 as Exhibit A;

3 2. Timely Removal: Defendant was served with a copy of the Summons and

4 Complaint on May 9, 2008. A true and correct copy of the Summons served upon

5 Dèfendant is attached hereto as Exhibit 8;

6 3. Answer: On June 6, 2008, Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiffs

7 Complaint with the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San

8 Francisco and served such Answer upon Plaintiff. A copy of the Answer and

9 accompanying proof of service is attached hereto as Exhibit C;

10 4. Jurisdiction: This is a civil action over which this Court has original

11 jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1331. In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges violations of the

12 Family and Medical Leave. Act 29 U.S.C. §2601 (Ex. A, 9:14 - 10:22) and federal civil

13 rights statutes 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983,1985. (16:13 - 17:13.) Accordingly, this entire action

14 is removable to this Court pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1441 (b) and 28 )

15 U;S.C. § 1367.

16 5. Venue: Venue lies in the United States District Court for the Northern

17 District of California in that a substantial part of the alleged events or omissions on which

18 Plaintiffs claims are based occurred in San Francisco, California. 28 U.S.C. §1391(b);

19 6. Intradistrict Assignment: Pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-2(d), this action is proper

20 in the San Francisco Division because the action arose in the County of San Francisco;

21 7. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(d), a copy of this Notice of Removal is being

22 filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San

23 . Francisco;

24 8. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(d), Defendant is providing written notice to

25 Plaintiff;

26 9. State Court Documents: Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1446(a),

27 Defendant attaches herewith, and incorporates by reference, the following documents,

28 which are all process, pleadings, and orders served on Defendant and filed in the

- 2 -NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF ACTiON TO FEDERAL COURT 1468441.1


1 Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San Francisco prior to

2 the filing of this Notice of Removal:

3 a. Summons and Plaintiffs Complaint: San Francisco County Superior

4 Court, Case No. CGC-08-473761 (Exhibit A);

5 b. Civil Case Cover Sheet, Notice to Plaintiff of Case Management

6 Conference; Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Program Information Package; (Blank

7 Form) Stipulation to Alternative Dispute Resolution; Notice regarding Judicial Mediation

8 Program: San Francisco County Superior Court, Case No. CGC-08-473761 (Exhibit D);

'9 and;

10 c. Defendant's Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint (Exhibit C).

11 10. Service: Written Notice and Proof of Service of the filing of this Notice of

12 Removal by Defendant has been or will be served upon all parties as required by law.

13 WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this action now proceed

14 against Defendant in this Court as an action properly removed.

15

16 DATED: June 6,2008

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

HANSON BRIDGETT LLP

- 3 -NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF ACTION TO FEDERAL COURT 1468441,1


.0,00"

EXHIBIT A


S~MMONS'. (CITACION JUDICIAL)

HOTlel; TO DEFENDAN: ' .(AV1S0 At DEMANDADO): . " '"GOLDEN GATE RRIDGE HIGHWAY AN TRASPORTATIONDISTRICT¡ 'MICHL LOCTi,DAVID RIVERA; KAY WITT;and DOES i through 50, inclusive

( SUM.100.FO air lin O/ r

($Ol'AI usoPf &A COJ'

o!

\, .

yOU Ani; mmiG SUED BY PU\!iIFF:(LO ESTA DEMANDANOO EL DEMANDANTEJ: .DOUGLAS AliO'.

Ytx hi., JO CAlENDAR DAYS ati thl. IUmmCl"und i.t ~ art tWld OIyou to fIn lIdM ,.,;x.. li thl. çoind hav, acop Nftd em 1M pblntlf. A len_ or ph çin will I'pttc you You WIn RSpo mwt t.ln prop'~lfor If you _!'t theçe to'heal you ClP. l~''' be . eo fOthat YO un us for your rQl'" You ClA nneS tM.. cOrt to and mol!'fQnlon at lhe C.li'om~ COU onll Sllflp C.nt ~.~o.ea.~..~p). yOU couty,. IIbr.ry. or tlw CóOUn..~ you If you Uftno pa the fl ,. .. th CO dert to li, fM,walv.rlo If you do no fii. yOW rtt" OI tlme. you m-yIo til en. lY dehun. .nd 'fr wage.i ~. an J' ma be lakeii wiou fu waInG frOf tJi co. ..

ThW ... DtMr.1 rolr."" You Tn wi to can .n lIOMJ ri W4.lfyou i:iici kll.n .itor. yw ma WJnt to an inattorlM rarrlilnie.1f )'ou cannci .tihl' IUon)', you NY b..llibl fw "".1 Hrcnft lilprol 1.1 ~è..tlQO You ta \p th.. POofotou~ .. tM Calioria t.l Sak: w. tb (w;~pcllll,orii). th C.lif!'1iCou OnnM S.lf-llp Cener (ww.COl1lnfo,ca.gqlMl). 01 by iitaetlng yOV ~I co N cont ba ..WOon

r_ 30 ~s De çALNDAR de dtaw '..n~ ..cly".l9s JW ~.UM rM Pc.Krti (l,l co y ~ aw s. ~ 11 0C""" UM~ 0 un ~ tM iHlO pn'"" $v ~JU pOnc lJ ai .m en fo.to le'" eo sI r1". ~ w ui On r. .ti. & pO a-liya UI fol1 qw.im~ .infHll Su '"" .~ .-- .m. ~.. ...-i.,ni ItlAllcl"., .,e_. Ayu.de'''&.C~ ci '.C.,Ifr. tw.colntoCl.go~I....~de¥SdeSiic:Otor.eciile.aum4snm.SlIlpcp. II cu ~ ,-flll pl "..iiio de,. ~... Ie dl IH fo dunnd dt pl iH tu.. ~ It pt..riw rtsp . lllpo pu pe '" ~so po /n*' , .. aJ. .. pol au $11 su dllM , iw ii,. mn ~H.Y øts fWiJ/)leaii. NC"'~ ~ ".. un lI 1n~ Sino c:." un lb pu 11a, II unsti ~ "",5I.. ~ $I nc pèJWl li ab .,~ aw.øip/ C' lo tts pv ~ ~$ .It 'Jlfs eM lh ~ de Slio ~ ,¡" If dtlU PW tn øm gn si trnn de iu .". iikl..b deC~L.èt s. (WW.~~.Of, en elCwr deAyv. fi i,. Cò de ÇMItliww.r:Tnfo.uf1ls .. . fJ WJ COntco '' Cl 0 "eo .'.. Io

The name si edres of the co/Us:

. (1;1 noe y drec de ia co. l$):. .San FranciBco Superior Cou~t. of CaIifornia400 McAllister Street

San Frànciscoi California,-BY FAX

The name, addl', and telep numbe of p1alntfs attOrey. or plaintiff with an attomeyi is:(8 nqmbro. 13 drecc y ei nOmeo de tel6fon dll lbo9d de' demandantø, 0 del df1rrndsnl' que no ti, aboo.es):David M, Poore, E:sq. iSDN 'iii2541 (707) 763-7100Kahn BrOwn " Poore LLP ..755 Baywood Drive, suite 185petalum~lnC~iif~ia 94954DATE: l\ i. Ö Ll

8

(RJpr 01 s8rv;ce of rhi su .' Q ØNlce of Summons ((OIm POS-01(Paf9 preb8 de &ntrog d9 asta døti6 use eI formubrlo Prf of Seflee of Summons, (POS.010)).

NOT1CE TO mE pERSON SERVED; Yw are sc1. 0 és 8l\lndal dofonan .2.0 8S the ~ wed vnderth fictitous name of (spy):

3. 0 onboalf of (sp&):

under 0 CCP 416.10 (cors\io)

r..: CCP 416.20 (defct coraio)

o CCP41fJ,0 (assoation Of partnerIp)

o other (sp): .4. n bY penai delIv on (date):. .

o CCP 4'6.60 (minor)

,0 CCP .. 16.70 (cowv&tee)

o CCP 416.90 (authrlzoo pen)

SUMMONS

~..I..''* ...._. CO~.ClPo..".li.i.4lSU SO .

CA


, 1 David M. Poore, SBN 192541. KAHN BROWN & POORE LLP

2 755 BaywoodDrve; Suite 185Petiiluma, California 94954

3 Tel~hone: (707) 763-7100Facsimilc: (707) 763-7J 80

4 dpooTe~kahnbrownJl\w,çom

. ENp-0Ri;~.F L

S!!enorCóurl . .L. mlCDnl af Sun r-..co

5

MAR 2 8 zooe

e8R68NPARK-I::1l elerk

. ~'f . DfJp'U!Y rglCl'1;_0' .1.... ....,1,

CAMAOEroCESE

, A.UG! 9 Z008 ..9~l\

Attorneys for Plaintiff6 DOUGLASALARJO'

7

8

9

10

. DBP11iSuPERORCOVRT OF ÇAl.FORNIA- COUNT OF SANFRêlSCO '

UNTED JUDIClION

) 8

19Defendants.

Caii~No. . OS 0-0 B -473761

COMPLA FOR DAMAGE,EQUITABLE, AND/OR INJUCTIV,RELIEF

V10LATIONS OF GOVENM CODESeCTON 12940, £1' SEQ.; FAILUR TO .PREVENT AN INTIGATEHASSME; VIOLATIONS OF THECALIFORNIA FAMILY RIGHT ACi.GOVENT CODE SECTION 12945.1,ET. SEQ.;V10LATJONS OF 42U$.C. §§ .1981,1983, 1985,ETSEQ.: VlOLATTONS. OF TH CALIORN CONSTITUTION;

. VlOLATIONSOF CALIFORN LAORCODE § 233; VIOLATIONS OF TH FA1RLAOR STANDARS ACl. 29 U.S.C. §2 i 5: viOLA nONS OF THE' FAMYMEDICAL LEVE ACT, 26U.S.C. §§2601,

. ET SEQ.; VIOLA TrONS OF CIIL CODESECTION 1708.8 .~" '

~r hJUy TR DEMAED

DOUGLAS ALARID,11

l2 piajntift:13

v.14

15GOLDEN GÁ 1' BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND

16TRANSPORTATlON DlSTICT; MICHALLOCATI;DAVIDRIRA: KAYWl; and

J 7 DOES 1 thrugh 50. inclusive, .

20

21

22

23

24 Plaintiff DOUGLAS ALARID èomplainian allcges(1I foJIows:

.25

26

27

PAES AN JUISDICTON

PI aintiff DOUGLAS ,ALA is, and at.aJI relevant times hero, ha bi: il1.

28 resdent of the State of Cali fomi a. Plaintiff Alard was an employee ofdefcndant GOLDEN

-1-COMPLAINT i:OR DAM~OE, EQUIABLE AN INJUCTVE RÈÏ.


GATE BRIGE mGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DISTR1CT ("Golden Gate Bridge" Or

2. "detèndanr' within the meaing of California Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA "). .

3 2. At all relevant times, defendat Golden Gate Bridge was an employer within the, ,4 meaning of the California Family Rights Act ("CFRA"), and, as such, was prõhibited from

. 5 harssing, discrminating and rctaliating in employmcnton the basis of disabilty/medical

6 COndition association or'assering fai:ily leave rights. Defendant was also an employer within the

7 meaning of the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993. 29 U.S.C. Sections 2601. ct. seq. ("FMLA"),

8 in thatitis engaged in industr affecting interstate commerce and has employed, atall relevant

9 times, over 50 employees to qualitY as an employer under the FMLA

10 3. Defendant Golden Gate Bridge, including its deparents. units, and/or poli,ticaJ

i i subdivisions, are and at nIl relevant times hereto, were employer operting as public entities

12 within the State ofCalifomiå, County of San Fracisco, who regularly employed moreth¡in five

13 persons.

.14 4. Defendant Golden Gate Bridge is a coUnty rtninícipality located' within the State of

.15 California iid doing business as a governent entity under color of state authority and law.

J 6 5.. Defendant MICHAEL LOCATI ("Locati" or'~defendant") is an individual whose

i 7 resid~nce is locted in the State'of California. Defendant Locati is a suerisor a.dlor manageral

J 8 employee of the Golden Gate Bridge. For puroses of the cause of action under the Civil Rights

19 Act, defendant LOcati is being sued in his individual capacity acting under color oflaw.

20 6. At all relevant times herein, defendat Loeati was a supersor,manager, and/or

21. managing agent of the Golden Gate Bridge, and as such was prohibited from harassing and

22 retaliating agiiinst employees on the basis of niakrig complaints 'regarding violations of the .. .' .. .23, Ciùifomia Fair Employment and Housing Act.

24 7. Oefèndant DAVID RIVERA ("Rivera" or "defendant") is an individual whose

25 residence is located in the State of California. Defendant Rivera is a superisor and/or

26 manageral employee of the Golden Gate Bridge. For puroses of the cause of action under the

27 ,Civil RightS Act, defendant Rivera is being sued in his individual capacity acting under color of.

28 Jaw.

-2-.._-_.. .... - -- _. . .COMPLAT FOR DAMGE, EQUITABLE, AND INJUCT REF


..

8. At all .relevant timeshercin, defendant Rivera was a supcrisor,managcr, and/or, ,2 managing agent of the Golden Gate Brldge, and as such was prohibited from harassing and

3 retaliating against employees on the basis of making complaints regfiding violations of the

4 Califonúa FairE,ployment and Housing Act. '

5 9. Detèndant KAY W1lT .("Witt" or "defendant") is an individual whose residence is

6 located in the State of , California. Defe~dant Witt is a supeI"isor and/or managenalemployee of

7 the Golden Gate Bridge. For purposes nf the cause of action' under the Civil Rights Act,

8 defendant Witt is being sued in herindividtial capacity acting under color of law.

9 10. 'At aU releviittimes herein, defendant Witt was a supersor, manager, and/or

10 managing agent of the Golden Gate Bridge, and as such was prohibited frm hanssing ~d

II retaiating against employees on the basis of ~akng complaints regarding violations of the

. 12 Califoriiia Fair Employment and HoUsing Act.

13 11. This Court has jurisdiction and venue over ths action in that defendant Golden

14 Gate Bridge 'employed plaintiff withjn the County of San Francisco, Slale of California. ..

15 12. Plaintiff has exhausted all ad~jnistrtjve remedies with the Deparent of Fair

16 Employment and Housing ("DFEH"). Plaintiff filed a: timely administrtive charge with the

17 DFEH;DFEH investigated the charge for' approximately one year; an~ plaintiffhas fied this

18 action withn one year of the issuance of the right~to-sue letter.

19

20

21

13. Plaintiff does not know the true names, capacities and identities, whether

corporate, parership, individual or otheiise, of defendants sued herein as DOES i through 50,

inclusive, and for this reaSon sues each defendant by such fictitious names in accordance with

Section 474 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffis infonned and believes, and on that basis22

23

24

25

26

alleges, that each of the fictitiously-named defèndants is legally resonsible for the events and

actions refered to in this Complaint and wrongfully caused injury and damages to plaintiff as

alleged below. Plaintiff will seek leave to amend this complaint to stte these defèndants' tre

names and capacities when they àre ascertained.

27 14. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereby alleges that each of the defendants

28 herein were at all times relevant hereto, the agents, representatives, serants and employees of the

-3-_.._.COMPLAI FOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE, AND INJÙC' RELIEF


- --

remaining defendants, and Were acting at least in p~ within the course and scope of such

2 relationship, and that the wrongfl acts alleged herein were committed by such defendants, and

ieach of them. Furtherore, plaintiff is infonned 3?d believes that defendants were, at all relevant

4 times, one integrated enterprise and/or employer for. purpses of FEB A.

5

6

7 is.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND,

PlaintiffAlard is a fonner employee of defendant Golden Gate Bridge. At all

8 relevant times, plaintiffwas Ii Hispanic male ilat asociated with a family member who suffers. " . ., '9 frm a disability and/or medical condition, including requesting medical leave to cae for that

10, .family member. As such, plaintiff was a member of a protect~ category for purses ofFEHA.

i 1 16. On or abut November 7, 2002, plaintiff washired as a Bridge Patrol Officer, a

12 law enforcement position, for the Golden Gate Bridge. At the time that plaintiff began his

13cmployment and tllrQugh(;rut his employment at the Goiden Gate Bridge, pl~ntiff was:qualifed to .

i 4 work in this Jaw enorcement position. Throughout his employment with the Golden Gate

15 . Bridge, plaintiff dilgently and competently performed his duties, and received pay increases in

16 accordance with his peronn~ce. Plaintifffurter recived consistent praise regarding his

17 . abilities and skille~el, and was provided with excelleu;t evahiations for his perormance.

18 17. On or about January 20,2005, plaintiff applied for a promotion to the position of

J 9 Bridge Sergeat, a supervsory title at the Golden Gate Bridge Distrct. Plaintiff met the

20 quaifications for promotion, and was eventually forwarded to the final oral board for a panel

21 interiew.

22 18., ' '

Once plaintiff arved at the panel interew for promotion, he noticed that

23 defendant Locati' s wife, Lisa Locati, was a member of the oral board. Plaintiff believed that this

24 . assignent may have been imprope because plaintiff had previously been involved in an internal

grevance and complaint regarding defendant Locati. During the ora board, it was obv'ious that', '25

26

27

28

defendant Locati's wife was not neutral and unbiased. Instead, thoughout the oral board,.

defendant Locati's wife consistently made inapproprlate and demeanng remarks and comments

towards plaintiff in an attempt to prevent him from obtaning a promotion. Plaintiff is informed

-4-, -. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGE, EQUIABLE, AND INJUCTI RELIEF


--

and believes that def~ndanis placed Mrs. Locati on the ora board for the puroses of denying

2 plaintiffs promotion.

3 19. In late-Februar and March 2005, plaintiff fied an internal complaint with

4 defendants requesting that defendant Locatl's wife be removed from the oral board, and that any

5 oral board results be invalidat~.

6 ' 20. Defendants ignored plaitiffs concerns, and, insteaden~aged in repeated acts of

7 retaliation and harassment towards plaintiff based upon his complainisand his race and/or

8 nationalongin. Moreover, defendants failed to reasonably investigate plaintiffs complaint, and,

9 instea, allowed the harassing conduct to continue. As aresult,t plaintiff was denied the

10 promotion, and was not provided with a promoÜon board that was fair and impartaL.

i 1 21. On or about April 15, 2005, after becoming a qualified employee under the FMLA

12 and/orCFRA, plaintiffapp1ied forthe FMLA and/or CFRA leave on an intennittent basis to care

13 for his elderly mother. Plaintiff provided defendants with adequate and reasonable wrtten and .

14 verbal notiCe of the heed to take FMLA and/or CFRA leave on an intermittent basis.' Plaintiffs

15 . mother was sufferng from hear disea~ and kidney failure, and required hospitalization for hear

16 s\lrgery,hear bypass, and a kidney trplant, that required plaintiffs asistàce on an

17 intermittent basis for basic car .and treatment with daily life activities. Plaintiffs mother was

18 . under the continuous treatment or supervision of a health care provider. As a result, plaintiffs

19 . mother had a chronic sçrOlig health coiidition that qualfied plaintiff as an eligible employee for

20 ,purposes of the FMA and/or CFRA.

21 22. Plaintiffs mother further suffered frm 3 disabilty and/or medical condition that

22 substatially limÙed her daily life activities. Plairitiffs mother's disabiltya'nd medical condition

23 required reasonable accommodations for leave requests so that plaintiff could adequately care tor

24 his elderly mother.

25 23. Plaintiffs mother's treating physician completed the necessa paperwork for

26 FMLA and/or CFRA leave, and placed plaintiff òn interittent leave until March 31, 2006.

27 During this period öfJeave, plaintiffwas authonzed to take increments of leave thughout the

28' work-week to car for his mother..

-5-_..,- ..

, COMPLAT FOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE, AND INJUNCT RELIEF


-'

1 24. Once defendants became aware of plaintifr' s mother's disability .and medical

2 condition, including'his request for iriterittentFMLA andJor CFRA leave"defendants engaged

3 in a campaign of harsment, realiation, interference,and discrimination as a direct result of

4 these protected categories, and d~fendants bega to look for any ~eason however slight to target

5 plaintiff's employment with the goal of supportng discipline and terination.

6 25. From approximately April200S:and conti~u!ng up until the" date ofplaintifis

7 termination ODor about March 30, 2006, defendant~ subjected phiintiffto discrmination,

8 harassment, retliation, and unequal treatment in the workplace on the basis that plaintiffs

9 mother had a serous medical condition and disabilty/medical condition and plaintiff requested

10 family and medical leave in accordance with the federal and state laws. Defendants fuher

11 engaged in a patter and practice of intererng with, restrning, and arbitrarly denying plaintiff

12 and other sirilarly situted employees farilymedical leave rights, including but not limited to:

13 (1) treating ,employees that assered famly medical leave nghts differently in the workplace; (2)

14 'providing different levels of discipline for employees that asserted farly medical leave rights; .

15 . (3) arbitrarly changing the employees' work schedule or amount of hours worked in a week to.

16 adverely impact the calculation for medical leave; (4) falsely informing plaitiff that he had

17 exceeded his allowable fari~y m~ical leave or that he needed to "re-certfy" for leave; (5)

18 engagig in stereotypical cOIIents and atttudes towards plaintiff and other similarly situated

i 9 employees who took medical and family leave; (6) refusing to providc or providing misleading

20, FMLA information; (7) wrongfully denying medi~a1leave despite the fact that plaintiff and other

21 similarly situated employees Were qualified and eligible for continued leave; (8) wrongflly

22 inform pi~intiff of his sÌàtus regarding his recerfication reuir~ent8 under the FMLAand/or

23 CFRA; (9) treating plaintiff and other similarly 'situated employee in a hostile and rude maner

24 for takng medical leave; (10) mischaraeterzing FMLA and/or CFRA leave; (II) makng

25 imprope and demeaning comments, slur, and remarks conceing medical leave; and (12)

26 engaging in a pattern and practice of interferng with plaintiff and other similarly situated

27 employees' rights to FMAand/or CFRA leave. Defendant Golden Gate Bri~ge also changed its

28 FMLA policy without any notice to plaintiff and other similarly situated employees.

-6-COMPLAINT FOR DAMGE, EQUITABLE, AND INJUCT REIEF,


-26. During this time, defendants furter discriminated, harassed, and retaliated against

2 plaintiff based upon hisnationalorigiand race, including creating a hostile work environment

3 based upon the fact that pJaintiffwas a Hispanic worker.

4 27. Moreover, durig this period of time, plaintif!requested that defendants allow bir

5 to work an outside and separate par-time job asa federal police offcer to supplement his íncome

6' so that he could adequately care for hismoth~r's financial and medical needs.

7 28. In or about late~December 2005 and Jani. ,2006, plaintiffs mother's medical

8 . condition began to significatly deteror~te. Plaintiff was required to take more intermttent

9 family medical leave durg ths perod of time to cae for his mother.

i:o 29. Plaintiffs need to take additional and legally permissible intennittent leave was

11 .met with hostilty by defendants. . In early.,Januar 2006, defendants irrediately placed plaintiff

12 on an improper "sick leave" disciplinar progra that directly affected his rights to FMLA and/or

13 CFRA leave.

14 30. On or about Januar'29, 2006, p1aintiffrequestcd the réasonable accommodation

i 5 of a "shift exchange" With another påtrol offcer so that he. could care for his mother. The other

16 offcer was agreeable to the shift exchange; and engaging in shift exchanges was a common

17 custom and pr~ctice at the Golden Gate Bridge Distct.

18 31. Plaintiffs request for reasonable accorrodations was also met with hostilty, and

19 was unlaterlly denied without any reaonable explanation. Defendants refued to teasonably

20 accommodate plaintiffs re9uest, and furùer failed to engage in the good tàith interactive process

21 to deterine the reasonableness of the requested accommodations, including what

22 . accommodations were appropnate under the cic~mstances. Instead, defenda~ts continiied to

23 harass, discrminatc, and retaliate agaist plaiiitiffbased upon his requests for leave and

24 accommodations.

25 32. During this period of time, plaintiff continued to make interal complaints

26concemingdefendants' improper actions, but defendants refused to investigate the complaints.

27 and, instead, engaged in adverse actions towards plaintiffbascd upon his protected requests.

. 28

-7-COMPLAINT FOR DAMGE, EQUIABLE, AND INJUCT RELIf


/ 17

18

19

20

21

22

--

33. Morever, when defenda.ts became aware of plaintiffs internal complaints, the.' . .2 . harassment, discriination, interlerence, and retaliation intensified and became worse, including, '3 but not limited io (I) ~ngful1y disciplining plaintiff; (2) providing plaintiffwith negative work" '4 evaluations; (3) providing plaintifTwith a verbal admonition for petty and untre allegations; (4)

5 interfcring with plaintiffs use of sick leave and family.medical leave; (5) opely criticizing

6 plaintiff for using authorized s,ick leave; (6) i~oring plaintiffs mother's doctor's

7 recommendations; (7) targeting plaintiffs employment for ~'discipIiriar action" and, , '8 "termination"; (8) harassing and criticizing plaintiff on a daily basis;.(9) targeting and monitoring

9plaintifls employment in an attempt to crte a record for termination; (l 0) making conuents,, ' ,10 siurs, and remarks; (I J) treating plaintiff djffer~ntly than similárly situated employees based

11 upo~ association-related disabilty, medical condition, and assering family-medical leave rights;.

12 and (12) retaliating against plaintiff for using perissible and allotted sick leave compensation

13' time, and requesting reasonable accoinodations:

14

15

16

34. Furermore, after plaintiff madê intemà1' complaintsregarding his FMLAandlor.

CFRA ¡eave, defendantS began lookig for any reas~n to taget and terminate piaintifIs

employment. 10 Januar and Februar 2096, defendants hiredseverni unkown private

invesigation firms to "follow" plaintiff andconduc:t "sureilance activities" ?f plaintiff in an

atempt to target his employment. Inpariçular, even though plaiiltifThad prcviousIy advised

defendant's of his par-time employment (in which plaintiffwas not eligible for FMLA andJor

CFRA), defendants instructed their "private investigators" to monitor plaiiltiff at his outside

. employment in an attempt to support a case of FMLA '''abuse.''

35. Dung this time, defendants retained, directed,~olicited, induce, and/or caused

23 several ui0wn private investigators to conduct sueillance of plaintiff and his mother without

24 any probable cause, reaSonable or ariculable suspicion; or anyother reasonable basis. During the

25 course of this investigation, defendants violated plaintiffs right of privacy and captured visual

26 images of plaintiff inside his house, his mother's house, and other loctions in which hc had a

27 reasonable expectation ofprivacy~ Defendats' invasion of privacy was offensive to a reasonable

28 person in light ofplaintifls circumstances, and was intended to capture plaintiff in engaging in

-8~

COMPLAINT FOR DAMGE, EQUITABLE, AND INJUCTVE RELIEF


~ ..'

. i. personal or familal activity that had nothing whatsoever to do with plai~t.ffs employment with

. 2 Golden Gate Bridge.

3 36. Defendants' sureilance confirmed what they already kne~: plaintiff was

4 working a par-time job to supplement his income, and plaintiff spent a considerable amount of

5 time carng for his mother.

6 '37. qn or about March 30, 2006, defendants terminated plaintiffs employment

7 without any adequate o~ reasonable due process heariig as a direct result of plaintiffs p~tected

8 categories identified above. Defendants further terminated plaintiffs elnployme~t bascd upon

9 false, inaccumte, and misleading reaons, including FMLA "abusc" and working in an "outside

1 0 employment" situationwiÙ1out authorization. Plaintiffs terminaton was discriminatory and alsO

11 in direc retaliation for her previous complaints of discrmination, harssment, retaliation, and

i 2 unequal treabnent in the workplace.

13

14

15

'FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

'~i~t~;;nirJ'~ii~;~~~ All defendants) ,

Plaintíffrealleges and incorpraes by reference Paragraphs 1 though 37 of this16 38.

17 Complait as though fully set fort herein. ,

18 39. Plaintiff real leges and incorprate by, reference Pargraphs 1 through 28 of this

19 Complait as though fully set fort herein.

20 40.' Plaintiff was aneHgible employee for puroses of the FMLA.

21 41. PlainiIfTs mother ~ffered from a serious medical conditi~n.

22 42. Plaintiff was initially approved for family medical leave' under thc FMLA by

23 defendants for plaintiffs mother's serious medical conaition.

24 43. Family Medical Leave Act of 1993,29 U.S.C. Sections 2601, ct. seq. prohibits

25 defendants from interferng, restraing, diserminating or retaliating against an' employee for

26 exercising family medical leave rights, or deJiying an eligible employee's family medica leave.

27 The FMLA further prohibits an employer from changing its FMLA policies without providing

28 reaonable notice to U1e affected employees.

-9-

COMPLAOO fOR DAMGE, EQurrABi., AN INJUCT RÉLIEf


-- --

44.. In acting above, defendants violated theFMLA with regard to plaintiff when it

2 discnminated against plaintiff for asserting rights und~r Ule FMLA, retaliated against plàintiff in

. 3 takg adverse employment actions for plaintiff's exercise ofnghts under the FMLA, .interfered

4 with plaintiffs family medical Icave, restrainedplaintiffs family mediCalleave, denied plaintiffs

5 legítimate fámily medical leave, and ulthiiately terminated plaintifts employment while plaintiff

6 was on FMLAleavc and in direct retaiation for plaintiff exercismghís rights W1d~r the FMLA

7 and making internal complaints ofFMLAviolations.

8 . 45.. Defendant Goldèn Gate Bndge further violated the FMLA when it changed its

9FMLA policies and procedures without providing any reasonable notice to plaintift' and other

1 Qsimilarlysituated employee.

ll 46. In acting above, defendant Golden Gatc ~ridge has a pattern and practice o.f

12 violating the,FMLA. Defendant maintains apattem and practice of: (1) r.etaHating against

i 3 employees who exercise their rights undcrthe FMLA¡ (2) interfering with affected employees'

14 rights underthe,FMLA; (3) changingtheFMLA policies and procèdures; and (4) discriminating

15 agaisteiployees who have asserted rights under theFMLA.

16 47. As a direct and proxiInate result of defendants' conduct, plaintiff has suffered loss

17 . of employment. lost wages an4 benefits, future wase loss, other compem¡8tiori loss, and anomey's

18 .. feeS and costs.

19 48. As a fuer direct and proximate result of defendants'conduct,plaintifr seeks

20 interest; statutory damages, liquidated damages, equitable and/or injunctive relief, and any other

2 I . relief that the Court deems fair and just.

22 . SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION23. (Medical Condition/Disabilty Association Discnminaiion - FEHA - Defendant Golden Gate24 Bridge only)25 49. Plaintiffrealleges and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 thrugh 48 of this

. 26 Complaint as though fully set foM herein.

27

28

-10-COMPLAlNT FOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE, ANO INJUNCT RELIE


-,50. Califòniia Govenent Code §§ '12926(m) and 12940, et. seq., provide that it is an

2 unlawfl employment practice for ancmployer to discrminate in the 'tens and conditions of.

3 employment on the basis of a medical condition/disability associátion or perceived association.

4 51. Defendant violated Govcrncnt Code § 12940, et.scq. with regard to plaintiff

5 when it discrminated against plaintiff on the basis of his assoCiation with a peron that has a

6 ,disaility andlormedical condition, and terminated plaintiffs employment, and/or took other

7 adverse employment actions against Plaintiff as a result of plaintiffs association or perceived

8 assocation with a person that is a member ora protected categorY under FEHA, including the .

9 failure to make reasonable accommodations.

10 52. Defendant's conduct toward plaintiff as alleged above, constitiites.anunlawful

11 employmentpr8ctice in violation of California Goverent Code § 12940.

12 53; As a direct and proximate resultof defendants conduct, plaintiff ha suffered lossc , .. . . .. . . .13 . of employment, indignity. great humiliation and emotional dists niiifesting in phys~cal

14. . symptóms.

) S 54. Defendat's actions have cauSed and continue to cause plaintiff substatiai losses

16 . in earings, significant reputation and professional injury, loss of promotional opportwiities and

17 other employment benefits, lost wag~s,attomeys' fees, medical expenses, futuc eangs and

18 benefits, cost of suit, humiliation, embarassment an'danguish.. all to his damage in an amount

19 according to proof.

20 THI CAUSE OF ACDON21 (Medical Conditionlisabilty Association Harasment - FEHA '-All Defendants)

22 55. Plaintiffrealleges and incorporates by reference Pargraøhsl thro~gh 45 of this

23 Complait as though fully set fort herein.

24 56. California Goverment Code §§ 1 2926(m) and 12940(j) provide that it is an

25 unlawful employment practice for an employer. supersor, or any employee to haras any peron

26 on the basis of association or perceived association 'with a person that is a member of a protected

27 category underFEHA.

28

-11-COMPLAT -FOR DAMGE. EQur ABLE, AND INJUCTE RELIEF


57. Defendats violated Goverment Code § 12940(j) Withregii to plaintiff when ,

2 they engaged in severe and perasive conduct towards plaintiff, created a hostile work

3 environment for plaintiff, and harassed plaintiff in the workplace on the basis of1us association or

4 perceived asociation with ,his spouse, a peron with a disabilty and medicål condition as defined

5 under FEHA~

6 58. Detèndants' conducr toward plaintiff a,s alleged above, constitutesan unlawfl

7 employment practice in violation of Californa Governent Code § 12940. ', ,8 .59. Asa direct ard proximate result of defendants' harassing conduct, plaintiff has

9 . suffered Joss of employment, indignity, great humilation and emotional distress manfesting in

10 physical symptoms.

11 60. Defendiits' aC,tions have caused ¡md continue to cause plaintiff substantial losses

, 12 in earings, significantreputation and professjomÙ injur, loss ofpromotionii opportnities and .

13 other employment benefits, lost wages, attorneys' fees, medical expenses, future earings and

i 4 benefits, cost of suit, humilation, embarassment and anguish, all to their damage in an amount

i 5 according to proof.

I6 61.. The acts. of the individual defendants only as alleged hêrein, were intentional,

17 outrgeous, despicabl~, oppressive; fraudulent, and done with il wil and intent to injure plaintiff

i 8 and to cause plaintitrmental anguish, aniety, and distress. The acts of the corprate defendant

i 9 were furter committed by managing agents, offcers, or directors of the defendant, or ratified by

20 the defendant at a corprate leveL. The defendants' acts were done in conscious disregard of the

21 risk of severe emotional harm to Plaintiff and with the intent to injure Plaintiff, constituting

22 oppression, fraud; malice under California Civil Code §3294, entitling Plaintiff to' puiiti~e

23 damages as to all individuái defendants.

24 /11

. 25 III26 III27 III28 /11

-12-. CÕMPLAIN FOR DAMAGE, EQuiTABLE, AND INJUCT RELIEf


'- -1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

2(Medie~l ConditionlisabiltyAssociation Retaliation - FEHA- Defendant Golden Gate Bridge3 ..... - '~0 "'.-

4

5 62. PlaintitlreaJleges and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 through 61 of this

6 .' Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

7 63. Californa Governent Code §§ 12926(m) and 12940(h) provides that it is an. , . ." - .8 unawful employment practice for an erployeror any other person to retaliate àgaist an

9 employee for opposing an unlawfl employment practice or filing a complaint of discrmination

to or harassment.

11 64. Defendants violated Govercnt Code § 1 2940.with regar to Plaitiff when they

. 12 involuntarly transfered; demoted, denied próm0ti0nal'opportunities, conducted inappropriate

13 discipline iid other adverse. employrent actions, and then 'ultimately terminated plai~tiff

14 employment as a resl.ltotmaking complaints.to dcfcndanfsof discriination, retaliation, ui:equ¡d .

15 treatent, and harsment in the workplace and then requesting that an immediateinvestigation .

16 . and remedial measures be taken. .

17 65. Defendants' conduct toward plaintiff as alleged above, constitutes an unlawful'

18 ,employment practice in violation of California Govenuent Code § 12940.

19 66. As à diret and proximate result of defendants' retaliatory conduct, pláintiff has

20 suffered loss of employment, indignity, great humiliation and emotional distress manifesting in

2 I physièal symptoms.

22 67. Defendants' actions have caus'ed,and continue to cause plaintiff substantial losses

23 in eaings, significant reputation and professional injury, loss of promotional opportunities and

24 other employment benefits, lost wages, attorneys' fees, medical expenses: futur earngs and

. 25 benefits, cost of suit, humilation, embarrsment and anguish, all to their damage in an amount

26 accrdingto proof.

27

28

-13-COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGE. EQUITABLE, AND INJUCTI RELIEF


'- -'

F1l'H CAUS:E OF ACTION

2 . (McdicalLeave Discriination- CRFA - Defendant Golden Gate Bridge only)

3 68. piaintiftrealh~ges and incorpo¡'ateby reference Paragraphs:i through 67 ofthis .

4 Complaint as though fully setforthetein.

5 69. California Goverient Code § 12945.1, et. seq., provide that it is: an unlawful

6 employment practice for an~ployer to discriminate in the terns and conditions of employme"nt

7 on the basis of assertng family medical leave rights under the Californa Family.Rights Act.

8 70."; Defendant violated GovcrentCöde § 12945.1, et. seq. with regard to plaintiff

9 . when it discriminated :lgainst plaintiff on the basis of his asseron of rights under the CFRAi and

10 terminated plaintiffs employment, and.or took other adverse employment actions against

11 plaintiff, including reaonable accomodiitions.." .12 71. Defendant's.coJiducttoward plaintiff as alleged above, constiMesan unlawful

13 employment practice in. violation of Cali fomi a Govèmment Code§ 12945.2~

14 72. As å diret and proximate result of defendat's conduct, plaintiff hàssuffered loss,

15 of enployment, indignity, great humliation and eIòtional distreSs maifesting in physical

. 16. symptoms.

17 73. DefendaIt's actions have caused and continue to cause 'plaintiff substantial losses

18 in earings, signit1cànt reputation and professional injury, loss of promotional opportunities and

19 oÙleremploymentbenefits, lost wages, attorneys' fees, medical expenses, future eamings,and

20 benefits, cost of suit, humilation, embarassment and anguish, all to his damage in an amount

-

21 according to proof.

22 SIXTH CAUSE OFA'CTION23 (Medica Leave Retaliation - CFRA ..Defendant Golden Gate Bridge only) .

24 · 74. Plaintitfrealleges and incorpomte by reference Paragrphs 1 through 73 of ths

25 Complaint as though fully set fort h~ein.

26 75. Californa GoveIlent Code § 12945.2 provides that it is an unlawfu

27 employient practice for an employer to retaliate against an employee for oppsing an unlawfl

28 employment practice or fiing a complaint of relating to aserton of rights under the CFRA.

-14-COMPLAT FOR DAMAGE, EQUITÂBLE, AND INJUcrivE RaTEF


76. Defendants violated Govenuent Code §12945.2 with regard toplaintiffwhert

2 they denied promotional opportties, conducted inappropriate discipline and other adverse

3 employment actions, and then ultimately terminated plaintiff employment as a result of makng

4, complaints to defendants of violations of the CFRA in tleworkplace and then requesting that an

5. immediate investigation and remedial measw-es be taken.

6 77. ,Defendants' conduct toward plaintiff as alleged above, constitutes an iiawfl, ' ,7' employment practice in violation of Cali fomi a Government Code § 12945.2.

8 78. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' retaliatory conduct, plaintiff has

9 sutlered loss of employment, indignity, great humilation and emotional distress manifesting in

10 physical symptoms.

11 79. Defendants' actions have caused and continue to cause plaintiff substantial losses

12 in earings, significat reputation and_professional injur, loss of promotional opportwiities and

13 other employment benefits, lost wages, attorneys' tèes, medic;l expni;ei;, future eangs and .

14benèfts, cost of suit, hunuliatión, embarrasent.and anguish, all to their damage in an amount

1 5 according to proof.

16 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION17 (Faihire to Prevent Discrimìation - Defendant SCOE)

18 80. Plaintiffincorprates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in

. 19, paragraphs J through 79 of this complaint as fuHy set forth herein.

20 81. California Governent Code § 12940(~)et seq., providethàt it is an unlawful

.21 . employment practice for an employer to fail to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent

:22 discnmination, retaliation, and harassmen't from occurng in the workplace., '23 82. Def~ndant violated Governent Code § 12940 etseq., with regard to when

24 defendnnts knowigly and recklessly created a hostile work environment for plaintiff, failed to, '25 conduct reaonable and imparial investigations when plaintiff complained about discriminatory

26 conduct on the part of superisors and management, and failed to take reaonable steps necessa

27 to investigate the misconduct and prevent it from occurrng and continuing.

28

-15-COMPLAT fOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE, AN INmNCTE RELIEF


-- -'

1 83. Defendant's conduct toward plaintiff and other similarly situated employees as

2 alleged above. constitutes an unlawful employment practice in violation of California

3. . Goverent Code § 12940.

4 84. As a direct and proximate result of defendant's conduct, plaintiff has suffered loss

5 - of employment, indignity, grea humilation and emotional distress manifesng in physical

6 symptoms.

7 85. Defendant' s actions ilve caused and continue to cause plaitiff subst~tial losses

8. in earings, significimt reputation and professional.njury, loss of promotional opportnities and

9 other employment benefits, lost wages, attomeys' tèes, medical expenses, futureamings and

10 benefits, cost of suit, humilation, embarrassment and anguish, all to her damage in ri amount

11 accrding to proof.

12 .

13 ElC'HTH CAUSE 'OF ACTION

14

15 86.

(Violations of Civil RightsLRws - All Defendants)

Plaintiftïncorprates herein by reference all of the allegations'ùritaned in .

16 paragraphs 1 th0u:gh 85 of this Complaint as fully set forth herein.

17 87. Defendants actions and failure~ as alleged above constitute a patter and practice

18 of violations of the Civíl Rights Laws of the Unitcd Statesr42'U;S';Gi.~§4;98::r;l,9,85';Defendants

19 while aCting under color of state authonty and law wrongflly and intentionally discriminated

20 against and retaliated against plaintiff because of his protected categories, including face. national

21 origin, aSsociation disability and medical condition thus treating j,laintiffin an unequal manner

22 witllOut any rationaI or iegitim~te basis. Defendants'.conduct, as set fort above, constitutes

23 violations, under color of law, of plaintiffs nghts, pnvileges, and immunities guarteed to him

24 by the First Amendment of the United States Constihiion nghts of free speech and to petition the

25 government for redress of grevances, the equal protection clause of the United StateS

26 Constitution, and the due process clause of the Fourteenth AmtJdment of the United States

27 Constitution. Moreover, as set fort above, plaintiff was deDied both substantive and proceural

28 due process pnor to his termination as a public employee because 'defendants faiJed to provide

, .16-COMPLAINT FOR DAMGE, EQUIABLE, AN INJUNCT RELIEF


'-'

plaintiff with a hearng and/or oppominityto be heard pror to his terinati~n thus deprivig

2 plaitiff ofliber and prope rights.

3 88. Defendants' actons have caused and continue to cauSe plaintiff substantial losses

4 in eaings, signifi~treputation and professional injury, loss of promotional opportnities and

, 5 ~ther employßent benetits, lòst wages, attorneys' fees, medical expenses, futue earings and

6 ,benefits, cost of suit, humilation, embarsment ~d anguish, all to his damage in àn amount

7 according to proof

8 , 89. As to the individual defendants only, the acts of this defendant as allèged herein,

9 was intentional, outrageous, despicable, oppressive, frudulent, and done with il will and intent

10 to injure plaintiff a.d to cause plaintiffmental anguish, anxiety, and distress. Qcfendant's acts

J'l were done inconsciaus disregard of the risk of severe emotional har to plaintiff and with the

12 intent to injure plaintiff, constituting oppression, frud; malice under ,Californa CiVil Code

13§3294, entitling Plain:tiffto punitive damages against these defendant only.

14

15

'16

17

NINTH CAUSE OF AClION

(Violations of the Californa Constitution, Ar. I - Defendant Golden Gate Only)

90., , '

Plaintiff incorporatès herein by reference !Ill the allegations contained in

i 8 paragraphs 1 thrugh 89 of this complaint as fully set fort herein.

19 91. The Califomia Constitution, Article I, Section 7, provides ilat a public entity may

20 . not deprive a person ofa propery or liber interest without due process of Jaw. TheCalifomia

21 Constitution further protects plaintiffs freeom of speech, equal protection, and right of privacy

22 92" Ii; acting herein, defendant violated plaintiffs pro~rty and liberty due process

2~ rights in failing to províde pI ai ntitf with adequate procedura and substantive due process prior to

24 engaging in adverse employment actions against pJaintiffand terminating plaintiffs employment,

25 and violated plaintiff's constutiona rights of privacy, equal protection, and free speech.

26 93. As a result of defendant's a,ctions, plaintiff seeks equitable and injunctive relief,

27 including but not limited to reistatement and back-pay, and any other damages according to

28 proof.

-17-COMPLAINT FOR DAMGE, EQUITAIKE, AND INJUCT RELIEF


-

2

3

4

, TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Violations of the California Labor Code § 233 - Defendant Golden Gate Only) .

94. Plaintiff incorporates h~ein by reference all the allegations contained in

. 5 pargrphs 1 thugh 93 of this complaint as fully set forth herein.

6 95. California Labor Code § 233 prohib,its an employer from using pennissible sick

7 1 eave as a basis to discipline an employee, and discriminating or retaliating ~gairist aneniployee

8 that assers his or her rights to use allotted sick leave.

9 96. In acting above, defendant violated Californa Labor Code §233 when it ..

10 discrminated, retaliated, disciplined, and took adverse employment actions agains plaintiff for

11 using his aùt1orized sick leave.

12 97. Defendants' actions have caused and continu~ to cause plaintiff substantial losses

13 in earnings, signific~t reputation and professional injur, loss of promotional opportunities and

14 ' , other employment benefits, lost wages, attorneys' fees, -medical expenses, future earnings and, '15 .. benefits, cost of suit, humil i'ation, embatassinent and anguish, all to his damage in an amo~t

16 acCording to proof.

17

18

19

20

ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

98.

(Violations of the Labor Code § 215:: Defendant Golden Gate Bridge)

Plaitiff incorporates heretn by referenceaIltle allegations contained in

21 paragraphs 1 though 970fthis complaint as fully set fort herein.

22 99. The Fair Labor Standards Act, Labor Code § 215 prohibits an employer frm

23 discnminatingor retaliating against an employee thát files an interal complaint with the

24 employer regarding violations of the compenSation statues. including the assertion of sick leave

25 compensation.

26 100. . In acting above, defendant violated Labr Code § 215 when it discriminated,

27 retliated, disciplined, and took adverse employment actions against plaintiff for filing an internal

28 complaint regarding defendants' interference with her allotted sick leave compensation.

-18-COMPLAIT FOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE, AN INJUCTI RELIEF


'-

101. Defendants' actons have caused and continue to cause plaintiff substantial losses

2 'in earnings, significanireputation and professional inj\.ry, loss of promotional opportnities and.. ..3 other employment benefits, lost wages, attorneys' fees, medical expenses, future earnings and

4 benefits, cost of suit,humilatìon, embarassment and anguish, all to ner damage in an amount

5 according to proof:

6 TWELFfH'CAUSE OF ACTION7 (Violations of Civil Code Section 1708.8 .. All Defendants)

8 102. Plaintiffincorporates herein by reference a.i the allegations contained il .

9 paragraphs 1 through 1 01 of this complaint as fully set forth herein.

10 ,i 03. Defendants violated Civil Code Seèion 1708.8 when they impropely placed

i i plaintiflunder sureiJance and violated his right of privacy.

12. 104. Defendants caused plaintiff damages in accordance with proof at tral.

13 105. As'to the individual defendants only, the aCts of this defendant as alleged herein,

14 was intentional, outrageous, dèspicable, oppressive, fraudulent, and done with 11 wil and 'intent

15 to injure plaintiff and to cause plaintiff JI.ental anguish, aniety, and distress. Defendantsåcts

i 6 were done ìnconscious disregard ofthc riskof severe emotional hann to plaintiff and with the

i 7 inte~t to injure plaintiff constitutig oppression, frud, malice under Californa Civil Code

-18 §3294, entitling :Plaintiff to puntivèdamages against these defendant only.

19

20 PRAYER FORRELlEF2) Wherefore, plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants. and each of them as follows:

22 1. For general damages in an amount according to prof;

23 2. For special damages in an amoUnt according to proof;

24 .3. For prejudgment interest in an amount according to proof;

25 4~ For injunctive relief or other equitable relief according to proof,

26 5~ For reasonable attorney's fees and cost of suit therein~

27 6. For punitive damages i:gainst individual defendants only;

28 7. För statutory penalties and any other statutory relief;

-19-COMPLAT FOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE. AN INJUCTI RELlEf


-- -I 8. For such other and furter relief as the cour may deem proper.

'-

2 9. Plaintiff herebydemands a trial by jury.

3

4 Dated: March 28, 2008 KAHN BROWN & POORE LLP

5

6

7

8

9

10

,1,1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-20-, "CmviLAINTFOR DAMAGE, EQUITABLE, AND INJUCTE RELIEF


. ....... .-. '. .....

EXHIBIT B


Ð5!Ð7/2008 12: 41 707753'1 i ciO KBP SONoi~A PAGE 81/01

SUMM_,/oS(C,ITA CION. JUQICIAL)

NOTICE TO DEFENDANT:(AVlSO At DEMANADO): .GOLOñ:N GA:rE BRIDGE HIGFAY AN TRS POlt'1AT:r ONDISTRCT; MICHAL LOCATI; DAVID RIVER; KAY WITT;and OOES 1 through 50, inclusi ve

?';:;':"?;~N G,t,rr n!d!"'iJ'_ SUM.10,O7 :i i'" I, '¿\;;; .' ~Rir.ìJ1~q~!: .. .., - , . "(Šoi . :l'''V./.Ò pG'tR ~J

2008 MAY -9 pit 4: 30

SEGRtTARY OFTHE DJSTR/C'f, ,

~a.~~(IV~YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLANTIFF:(LO ESTÁ DEMAllDANDO EL DEMANDANTE):DOUGLA ALID

You hivo 3( CALENDAR DAYlhiftci this aiironu"d 1.11111 P"pi~ arÐ IUIl' on you to fllo II \l1U.. tBl'ponA allhli¿ cour lind hliveai:llp) !Sild on thll plaintIff. " A I,!tiir or phonii Oln will not protect yo\l. Your wrlben riiPQl1 muit be In proper lagil 'arm "you W3nt ll.c:urt'to hoar your elM. "!h.re mabe II court fOlm ihiit you cin lllJlI for yourro.wPoMIl. You e.n find thoJ! c;oui fOlfMlind mÓf 'JnfOf:ilon 11\ iha CbJifotn~ COIlI'U Online S..If-HIi'p Cenliir (wW.cou,rtinfo.eagovlselrtoJp),yourcounty ':iW:llbliry, or Iho cøiinhoueo .rnani:i you. If yOU ç;n()! pay Ihe nnng tao, ask thii OoUl cliirli for a fH w.l"., foJ', IfyQl do nO\ file :rout t'sp.nI$O on Ilmii, you may10l tho c:~ by ii.r..ull, 1lnd yoiir 'WgOe, monoy,:and proptrt m:y be tikimwlhoiil f\hor WWDlng from the court ' ,. Th&re LULL oter Jiial t6Cllremtnte. YO\lINY want to cDll 11/1 iromøy righi,awyi If you do not know an ~"o",iiy. Ynil may want 10 call DIl '

IiI1Qrn¥y refel,r.I.Jii..lce. If you Clnnot'urford 8Jllittey. you miiy be.lil1lblli fi frlllol 'P.røot frøm 3llnpiOßl liillOrvClllpto'ra. You øn loaA thlHll naripr groups at !he Cllilfonla Lagl Servicg, Web slle ('N,lawhølpçiirornladrg), tho Cilifomill, CO\I Online Silir-H.lp (drilor (ww.cOUlnfo,Cl.11oV/Ißilllp). or by couietlng your i~i c:urt or County bar lIoclatlon. '

rlVn~3( D/AS DE GALENDARI df~ ri qu I.imtroixm Nf .d6n Y f'~:J kiaJ$ plrø ".imnrar UlIlll'pl1Nh pa.~ .1m Qt co. y".cw aii ß 9ri 11n~ r;pla a1 dtiiriiil'; UDa "rio a untl II~. r.oMlt1C DO 10 ¡Nt"Øim. S~ rlSPUO(;pa ,IJliato ,linii qlJflGftlf tn for,,"" ht; corr sl i:l$ qu ~n $U (: 1m h i:. Espo/W. 'all hiya 'un formu//lrl au inwSpwf& U'llfpal1 "U nra. Pu~ .LILLfn MØl toWÐrloi ,¡ 1R carl.. y on;5J1/l1fW0dn ." "' l;tHrr 'rJr¡ Ayudiir/~ Al&COf ~.Cø/lfmllJ (w.COunflifo.CÐgoYlllWf/g/tit;I1r.Il, .17 IllblbHorlI eM l.yvs do!J condadoo on ", oo que 'llall lJ. oW $I ii

¡iuixP pliJ lli auotii dn ¡;lJcJn, pJll øi s_tlJ,1o df Iii corltJ ti hi d6 un fotmul,rl (/ lUimr:lón de PÐ~ . cifu S/ no pisemi$U rospu ll tlÐmPO, pu pe.,.1 Ct.s (J fn"'pfmloø ;y " CIe '" ¡Jni aurtar $U sudo. (ino y bf"na sIn mlIs 1lw11l1J.

. Hiiy of1:i rgu1siDiI ltølo&. E" nxmerllb/" auniim. II uøiiødo liiedl,,'imlNM: 81 nø aJoc.Q un Iiboad,puodøllllmN il UnSWcJ d" re/Sn ~ Illido, Si no puMI p¡ør., un 3bld, n ~/blf .au cumpliiçon lo f9i/&J pani D1i(l"" JllNoJl '1IDlrUI gNlirttis de un prrlJlflJ de strv/cias IølilliS sin /hoa dt IUCI. tiuodtl em;onlnr ø. gnJp( sin fin" de/ttI in II ¡itFg wob deCIlJT1rnll LDgJlI Sfnr (wwJtlw~lli'ml&01J, ,IJ .r Ciimro dl Ayuda de las COT ti Clllfll . ,ww:r;urlinfo,r:t¡'lf/htJ ø no Q lénrl lin ÇOøct ço fa cørci ° &f co~ 0 dø fldo localos.

The niimg i:nd addres of tle coort is: ClI! MJ..R:(EI nomba y dmcclt'm de Is cOe 9:;); . f1'" dI Cml'San ~ranciaco Superior Court of California400 McAllister. Sereet

San Francisco, Calitornia

The name, addra¡;. and telephone numbe of plaintiffs attorney, or plainUrf without an attorney. iii:(ei nombl". fa d1rcäny et númer de la/Mono del gbosdQ del demaridante, a del demada1l9 que no Ilene abogado. ss):David M. poo:ie, :e!lq., SEll' 192541 (707)763-7100Kahn Brown & Poore LLP755 ~ywood Drive. SÛite'lB5Petaluma, cal:fo:rni4 9i~54 n l.. UOATE;-MAR 28 2DD8 l:0raOn rar'i"" \ C~ by(~ctil') S~cref8rl(Fo prof of 88rvic of this summons, usa proor of 8énlce of Summons (form POS-010 .J(Para preba de entrga de !1st9 cI"Mn lise ef forular1o Proof of Servce of Summons, (POS-010)).

, .NOTJCE TO THE P~R$ON SERVED; Yol) are sei1. 0 as an iTlvldual defendiinl. '

.2. D. Q& the Persn sued under the ficttious name of (spacify):

M. RAYRAY

(Se.)

~d~;ti:~i~=~. '. .,!lU..loa (R.v, JonlA'l t. 2~J

3. Eionbehalfof(sP6c/fy): àoiJ.tt ~ b(\c\~#- \\~\.\Pi ~ \~lO~~Q"", . '... 't, 'lL.' ~\-Ulder. 0 CCP 416.10 (collration) CI CCP 416.0 (minor)

r.:J CCP 416.20 (defunct corpr.lfon) 0 CCP 416.70 (conservalèÐ)

o CCP 416.40 (aiisoi:latlon or ciartnershlp) D ÇCíf,jSQPU!hOrlad pll'n)~o\her (speci): . FSS ORGANI t\llU~ ,

,,_4. b ersonal deliv8 on i;al ' , , , p j ali..;,_, ,cø.ti~1 PIÇ_!lolI2.2. Q5~

$'

116A3~ì.m. 5/7120081:41:06 PM


. .." 0- o. oA :; ~. ° : :0...

EXHIBIT C


1 HANSON BRIDGETT LLPDIANE MARIE O'MALLEY - 139166

2 domalley~hansonbridgett;comJAHMAL 1. DAVIS -191504

3. jdavis~harisonbridgett.com425 Market Street, 26th Floor

. 4 San Francisco, CA 94105T elephorie: (415) 777-3200

5 Facsimilè:(415) 541-9366

6 Attorneys for DefendantGOlDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND

7, TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

ENDORSEDSul;rio! co~rt JfaliQmia

County of San Francisco

JUN 0 6 2008

GOR,oON PARK~L1, Clerk.BY: MARY ANN MORAN

Deputy Clerk

": .'.~.

9

10 'DOUGLAS ALARID,

UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

Nò. CGC-08-473761

.....

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18 DefendantGOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION

Plaintiff,, ' ,

DEFENDANT GOLDEN GAtE BRIDGEHIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATIONDISTRICT'S ANSWER AND .

. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TOPLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

v.

GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAYAND lRANSPORTATION DISTRICT;MICHAEL LOCATI; DAVID RIVERA;KAY WITT, and DOES 1 through 50,inclusive,

Defendants.

19 DISTRICT ("Defendant", by its attorneys Hanson Bridgett LLP, answer Plaintiff Douglas

20. . Alarid's ("Plaintiff') unverified Complaint as follows: ..

21

22

GENERAL DENIAL

1. . Defendant, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section,

!

23 431.30(d)¡generally denies and places at issue each and every material allegation

24 contained in Plaintiff's unverified Complaint and denies that Plaintiff has suffered any

25 damage in the manner alleged orin cmy amount as a result of the alleged. acts or

26. omissions of Defendant.

27 / / /28 / / /

- 1-DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'SUNVERIFIED COMPLAINT

,i

I,

1485032,1


1 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES2 . Defendant hereby asserts the following . affirmative defenses to Plaintiffs

3 unverified Complaint:

4 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, ,5 As a first andsepafate affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that neither the

6 Complaint n()r any purported cause of action alleged therein states facts suffcient to

7 . . constitute a cause of action against it., , ,.8 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE9 As a second and separate affirmative defense, Plaintiff's causes of action are

10 barred in whole or in part to the extent that Plaintiff has failed to exhaust his

11 administrative remedies pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act

12 and the California Labor,Code. ..

13 THn~D AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE14 As a third and separate affrmative defense, Defendant asserts that to the extent

.15 that Plaintiff alleges or relies upon acts or omissions occurring more th~mone year

16. before the filing of his complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and

17 Housing, if any, Plaintiff's claims based on such conduct are barred. .

18 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. ~19 As a fourth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that the alleged

20 . conduct of which Plaintiff complains Was based on one or more legitimate, non-

21 discriminatory arid non-retaltatory business reasons.

22 ' FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE23 As a fifth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff's

24 'causes of action for discrimination are barred, in whole or in part, because Defendant

25. would have made the same employment decisions concerning Plaintiff absent any

26 discriminatory or retaliatory motive.

27 / / /28 / / /

- 2-DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S

. UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 1485032:1


1 ,SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2 As a,sixth and separate affirmative defense, Plaintiff's causes of action are barred

3 'inwhole qr in part by the applicable statUtes of limitation, including but not limited to, CaL.

4 Codè of Civ. Proc. §§ 335.1 and 338, CaL. Govt. Code §12965(b), U.S.C.§§255(a) and

5 2617(c)(1) and 42 U.S.C. §1988.

. 6 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.. 7 As a seventh and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that its actions

8 about which Plaintiff complains were undertaken in good faith in compliance with

9 applicable federal, state, administrative, and local laws and règulations governing

to Defendant's operations.

11 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE12 As 'an eighth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges on information. '. . .13 and bel,ief that Plaintiff has failed to makereasohable efforts,to mitigate his damages, if

14 any..15 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE16 As a ninth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff's

17 causes of action are barred by the equitable doctrines of laches and unclean hands.

18 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE19 As a tenth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff's

20 causes of action are barred by the equitable doctrines of waiver and estoppel.

21 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.22 As an eleventh and separate affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that, to the

23 extent that Plaintiff may seek punitive damages against Defendant, pursuant to

24 California Government Code §818, Plaintiff is barred from recovering punitive damages

25 against a public entity, such as Defendant, a public entity created by the California

26 Streets and Highways Code Section 27500, et seq.

27 / / /28 / / /

- 3 -DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S.UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 1485032,1

¡.

Ii

I,I.!

I

Ii

Ii

Ii

Ii

I

¡

Ii


1 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2 Asa twelfth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff has, , ,3 failed to allege that he suffered frqma disabilty, or that Defednat perceived him to have- ." - . . ..4 a disability, and, therefore, Defendant was Under no duty to provide any --

5 accommodation. Defendant.further alleges that Plaintiff submitted a request for

6 intermittent leave, which was granted by Defendant.

7 THIRTEENTH-AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE8 As a thirteenth and separate affirmative defense; to the extent thatPlaintill alleges -

9 _ that he requested and was denied, a reasonable accommodation, Defendant alleges

10 _ that it is under no duty to accommodate Plaintiff .,who was not a qualified individual with

11 a disability or regarded as haVing a disability ~ and further Defendant was; thus, under _

12 no duty to engage in an interactive process; In any event, the alleged reasonable

13 accommodation of ashift exchange would impose an undue hardship án Defendant and

14 the operation òf its business. Defendant did authorize intermittentleavè.

15 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEl

i

i

I

I

i

16 As a fourteenth and separate affirmative defense, - Defendant alleges it has

17 satisfied the conditions of California Labor Code Section 3706,and that, to the extent

18 that Plaintiff's Complaint alleges injuries subject to recovery thereunder, Plaintiff's c1ç:ims

19 are barred by the exclusive-remedial provisions of California Labor Code Section 3600,

20 et seq.21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE _I

, I

As a fifteenth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs

causes of action àre barred, in whole or in part, by his failure to exhaust remedies under

the Memorandum of Understanding between his union and Defendant.

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a sixteenth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff is

precluded from recovery of any damages under the avoidable consequences doctrine to

the extent that Plaintiff unreasonably failed to use the complaint procedure or any other, ,, - 4-

DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'SUNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 1485032,1


1 preventive and corrective measures that Defendantprovided to its employees to prevent.

2, and correct workplace harassment, which would have prevented any alleged harm. .

3 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE4 As a seventeenth and separate affrmative defense, Defendant asserts that

5 ' Plaintiff unreasonably failed to complain or otherwise report any alleged harassment or

. 6 other allegedly improper conduct, and Defendantactions were in accordance' with its

7 policies and procedùres and the applicable law.

8' EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE¡i,Ii

9 As an eighteenth and separate affrmative defense, Defendant alleges that its, ' ,10 actions were taken as a result of the honest belief that Plaintiff misused his leave rights

11 under the Family And Medical Leave Act and/or the California Family Rights Act.

12 NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.13 As a nineteenth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant asserts that any

14 . alleged surveilance of Plaintiff wasèonductedin the course and scope of Plaintiffs

15 employment, was supported by an articulahle suspicion, wasfofthe lawful purpose.of

16 . obtaining evidence óf Plaintiffssuspecteitt fraudulent condUct, and was consistent with

17 the provisions of CaL. Civil Code §1708.8(g).

18 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

19 As a twentieth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs .

20 Complaint, and the purported causes of action thereof, are barred to the extent that '

21 Plaintiff failed to file a government tort claim as required by the California Government .

22 Code and/or failed to alleged compliance with government tort claim procedures.

23 Government Code § 905 et seq.

24 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

¡

I

25 As a twenty-first and separate affirmative defense, Plaintiff's causes of actionåre

26 barred to the extent each relies upon conduct for which Defendant has immunity

27 pursuant to California Government Code ;§§815, et sea and under applicable federal law'...J ~

28 governing immunity from suits brought pursuant to 42 U.S. G.§§ 1981, et sea-5 - .DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'SUNVERIFIED COMPLAINT ' 1485032,1


1 TWENTY- SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2 As a twenty-second and separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs cause of action .

. 3 for violation of civil rights is barred as Plaintiff was given a full bearing and an opportunity

4 to be heard prior to his termination, and was otherwise allowed to exercise complete

5 substantive and procedural due process.

6 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays as follows: ..

7

8

9

1.

2.

3.

Thet Plaintiff take nothing by this action;

That judgment be entered in Defendant's favor;

That Defendant recovers its costs 'and attorneys' fees in this proceeding;

10 and11 4. That tha Court grant such other relief as it deems appropriate.

12 DATED: June £,2008

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2'2

23

24

25

26

27

28

HANSON BRIDGETT LLP

MARIE 0 ALLEYHMALT. DAVIS

Attorneys for Defendant .GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAYAND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

- 6-DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'SUNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 1485032,1


2

,3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PROOFOF SERVICE, '. I, Adiam Gebremicael, declare that I am a resident of the State of California. I am over

the age of 18 years and not a party to the action entitled Alarid v. Golden GateBridge Highway.and Transportation District, etal, , San'Francisco Superior Court, Case #CGC-08-473761; thatmy businessaddtessis425 Market Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, California 94105, OnJune 6, 2008, I served a true and accurate copy of the document(s) entitled: .

. DEFENDANT GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATIONmSTRICT'SAN$WER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'SCOMPLAINT

in this action by placing said copy(ìes) in a sealed envelope, eaèhaddressed to the lastaddress(es) given by the party(ies) as follows: . . ,

DavId M. Poore, Esq.

Kahn Brown & Poore LLP755 Baywood Drive, Suite 1.85Petaluma, California 94954

., ~(By First Class Mail pursuaht to Code of CNiI Procedure section 1013.)1 amreadily familar with Hanson Bridgett's practices for collecting and processing.documents for mailng with United States Postal Service.. Following these ordinarybusiness. practices, i placedthè above referenced sealed envelope(s) forcollection and mailing with the United States Pöstal Service on the date listedherein at 425 Market Street, 26th Floor., San Francisco; CA 94105. The abovereferenced sealed,envelope(s).wil be deposited with the United States PostalService on the date listed herein in the ordinary course of business.

o(By Overnight Federal Express pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1013.)i depositèd each sealed envelope, with instructions to our Mailroom that thepackages were to be picked up by Federal Express for overnight delivery,

o (By Express Mail pursuant to Codè of Civil Procedure section 1013.) I depositedeach sealed envelope, with the postage prepaid, to be delivered via UPS to t)ieparty(ies) so designated C5n the service list. .

o(By Telecopy Fax pursuant to Code of Civil Procedures sectioh 1013.) I amreadily familar with. Hanson Bridgett's practice for processing of documents viaTelefaxò Following these ordinary business practices, i directed ,that the abovereferenced documents(s) be placed in the Telefax machine, with all costs ofTelefaxing prepaid, directed to each of the party(ies) listed on the attached servicelist using ti:e last Telefax numbers(s) given by the party(ies), and processedthrough the Telefax equipment, until a report is provided by that equipmentindicating that the Telefax operation was successfuL.

- 1 -

PROOF OF SERVICE RE,GGB ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1485066,1


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

(BYE-MAIL) I am readily familiar with Hanson Bridgett's practice for processing ofdocuments via. electronic mail (E-Mail). Following these ordinary business practicesI personally e-mailed a copy Of èach document to each ofthe parties listed on theabove-referenced service. list by sending the documents directly tottiem at their e-mail addresses listed above.

o

.1 declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above. is true and correct and was executed on June 6, 2008.in San Francisco, California,

~A. Adiam Gebremicael

- 2 -

PROOF OF SERVICE RE GGB ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1485066, i


...-".-.._.';.;0; ....... ;.. .-. ...EXHIBIT 0


( (Al1T Of ...lIm WI1l ATTOR /N.. $_ e..~ _ nnu¡avid M. Poore, Esq., SBN 192541

Kahn Brown Eo Poore'LP755 Baywood Drive, Suite 195Suite 185petaluma, california 94954

TELtP'O¡U.,~ ( 7 0'7 ) 763 .7 i 0 0 FAX NO,:A .. PlAint DOUG IDllPE COl1T ò" CAlIFORHL COTY Of SAN FAACI SCO. 5T1UAOss:400 MCAllister Streeti.l.~:n:'ClMOzPCW:.5an Franciscoi cali Cornia

WNC NaU!,CAse NAME: Alaridv. Golden Gate Bridge HighwayandTrang rtat 0 . "0 al. ,

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Copltic Case DesIgnatIon .m UnlimIted 0 Umlitd . 0 Counter 0 Joinder~~~~. (Am:~~I~ FIed With rir 3ppance by defèldant JU:

'exces $25 000 25 00 Of leu (Cal. Rules of Cort i rulo 3.402)

Hems '-6 oola fTSI be l&d se inslroio on

1. Chock one box beow for th case ly thai be Ø/rtbe thiscaBe. AuOTOn , ConhctB Au,(Z2) 0 Brd concan(06UI\~UIti rrl (48) L ì Rut 3,740 coll (09)Ot.. Pl~ In~rt 0 Ot~(09)p~ DN)l'or Dlniurec(18)o As~t' (04) 0 Ota- co(37) ..Dpl'iali1(24) . R..i~.DMe ~ee(.$) 0 Errdan Oit PtNI (2) ~(14)Ño~ (Othe TOI 0 Wrr.fI (33)DsusOds bt, buriS melle. 107)0 O'èr liB pn(~)o CM r1gits (08) Unbw DlIMrODt~(13) r:~ei(3l)o FrM (Hi) 0 RO'1dllàl (3o Intooe~ pr (19) rJ Di' (3o Proes&io ri(25Juk:tRtvo O\h nciPlNO it (35 OA.se faei (05)EmplOYmMt 0 P~,re: aibl MBd (11)"m W~ \Ntn (3) BWrfdrN(02)o ~ emiien (15) Ol jucial rt (39)

2. ThIs ease 0 Is 00. Is nOlt(plex under l'le 3.400 olthe CaliforIa R. ùles o. f Court. If the case Is còpiex. ,ma r-~'fad~uiring eJtcel )tal managemert: ' ' . ' " . n3, l- lol'O nomtx of ~r3tel reesed parties d. 0 l:irg" nubf of vwtnesAA

b. CJ Exteovll mot prae føl6lng diffÇ\1t 0#' noel e.. 0 Cooln:ron wi roated ¡,ions peng ii on or morcort$ .

Igses ~t wtll be t1mlHsuiii 1o reslve ' 10 other Cotles,states¡ Of coùtn~. or In a fooOf\ cort

c. 0 Substantial amout of domen~den . r. B SubS1antlal postUdmÐn Judciai wpetisiOn3. Rooediés $Oght (chek ar that apply); ii, CJ monet b. . nonmOlelaiy cieclarator or Injuncive rølef c. 0 puitiv4. Nuber of caUS6$ 01 aetio (s~: U lViolnlonl 01: f', Me41c.i cotdltlon/Oi...bl11ty "".ociatio~ DSnhl~t-

5. This C3~ 0 Is 00 Is not a cl~ss &eon sut toni ll.n....~t. Ret..U.tiOl¡ MedScal Leave Dlacd..SnatiOl, etc.

6. If thCt. are any knOY re~t.ed cases, tllo and SClJ a noice of relted C8.se. (Y~..15'.), .Dale: March 28, 2009,. ~. __ . _ . . .pavid M. POQreiIJlg¡~NT~J 122541 ., IS&II\~PARlYORA11EY'fQAP~¡;,"

NOTICE. Plaintif must rie ths cover sh wi the firs pape filed In tt action or proing (eiiæpt small cJalm8 caSè or ease riled

under the Probate Cod. FamIly Cod~; orWelf&re and InstiutS Code). (CaL. Rules of Co, rue 3.220.) Fallurll to file may reultIn sanctions.. '. Fie ths cover shee In ~ddltn to an cove 8h~ reqre by locl cort rue.. II this ease Is complex ur rule 3.400 et se. of the Ciililoma Rules of Co you rnust$èe a coy of this cove shee on alloth partes to the acton or prlng. . . ' . . .. Unless thIs 1'8 collecons case undet Nle 3.740 or a comptex case. thIs co si will.~ use for stetlstleal purpse"~~;, i

Fo .-Ior ~lM CIVIL CASe COVER SHEETSJca.iu "'Co""" i,:il.i3~,lQ. 3140.At'e-Q/ e: u CI. s_.. tl Mt-._.., 3,10~10IRw..ly,'.:i1) Ci.

H: çOf USE 00 Y. ~ . ..0.

RILED,-- St Co Of caiita

c: of san FrIl

'HO il !l?!iR'. Ml'" 41 .. L~"'"

GOR9.9~ P~RK.U. Clerk"" .lvt/l 1wTL'To. I . DepuC:Cli1, . 'CAlt~_,O 8-473761

llP'',2.

ProvISJollyCOl1t Civl ~on(Cal Riil" of Cou l'ln :;.W)1.uiio Anlltfrad rii (03)o CØ~ deloi(tO) ,o i.sit(40)o SæWr; ~(28)o en'~VToi bt (:)DIJl~ ~ cIms ar~ frlhtab Islt JlId c:ex c.WO(41) .,Enforcanl ói JuCJ Enci1d Ju (2)

. M*-IlMOI civn Complino RICO (27)

, 0 Ot empl (no spBlJ (42)Milnt.,CMI PMlol .o PlIhip and ~lgote (21)o Ot pe (no ~~) (43)

I

I

i,

i

Ii


CASE NUMBER: CGC-08-i~'l761 DOUGLAS ALARID VS. GOl r-i:N GATE BRIDGE HIGHWA 'i, '-.NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF

A .Case Management Conference is set foi'

DATE: AUG-29-2008

TIME: ,9:00AM

PLACE: Departent 212400 McAllister StreetSan Francisco, CA ~4102-3680.

All parties must appear and comply with Local Rule 3. '.

eRe 3.725 requires the filing and service of a case management stateme.nt form CM-11 0no laterthan 15 days before the case management conference.

However, it would fácilitate the I~suance of a case ma'nagement ,order

without an appearance at the case management conference if the case m¡:nagement

statement is filed, served arid lodgedin Department 212 .twenty-five (25) daysbeforè, the casemanagerrent

Plaintiff mùst serve a copy of this notice upon each part to this action with the 6u:mmons and

complaint. Proof of service subsequently filed with this court shall so state.

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY REQUIREMENTS

IT IS THE POLICY OF THE SUPERIOR COURT THAT EVERY C.IV1L

CASE PARTIèlPATEIN E1THER MEDIATION, JUDICIAL OR NON-JUDICIA ARBITRATION, THE EAY SETLEMENT PROGRA QRSOME SUITABLE FORNI

OF ALTERNATIV DISPUTE: RESOLUTION

PRIOR TO A MANDATORY SElLEMEN CONFERENCE OR T~JA.(SEE LOCAL RULE 4)

Plaintiff must serve a copy of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Information Package on each

defendant along with the complaint. .All counsel must discuss ADR with clients and opposing

counsel. and provide clients with a copy of the Alternative Dispute Resolution InformationPatkageprior to filing the Case Management State m ent.

(DEFENDANS: Attending the Case Management Conference does not take theplace of filing a written responseto the complaint. You must file a written

résponse with the court within the time limit required by law. See Summons.)

Superior Court Alternative Dispute Resolution Coordinator.400 McAllster Street, Room 103San Francisco, CA 94102(415) 551-3876. SU8 Local Ruløs 3~6, 6:Õ -Carid1'Õtjre -štïpulatlon to commissioners acting as timipo¡"a.. judges


", '

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)Program Informatiori Package

Alternatives to, Trial

There are other ways toresolve a' civil dispute.

. The platl mus ser a copy of the ADR inrmation pacleOD each defenda a10ngwi the Complait. (eRe 201~9(c))

.Supor Cour of caornCounty of San Frci

ADR-i 10/07 (Ja) Pa 1


'-' ,-

Introduction'

Did you know that most civil 18Wuits sette' without a tral?

And did youkn,ow that there are a number of ways to resolve CIIL dispute Withouthaving to sue somebody~ .These alteatives to a lawsuit are krown as alternative dispute rilutlons (ADR)I' .

The most common form of ADR are mediation. arbitrtion and caso evaluatJon.. There are a number ofc)ther kl~ds of ADR as well.

In ADRl trIned, Impartal perons decide disputes or help partes doçlde disputethemselves. Th-.ø persons ncalled rteutrls. For example, In mediation. theneutrl is the mediator. Neuls nonnairyarechosèn by the disputing partes or bythe court Neutrls can help pal1es reolve disputes without having to go 10 court

ADR Is not new. ADR is a'Allable In many communities through clIspÙt.resolutJonprograms arid private noutrals.

Advantagøsof ADR '\

ADR can'have a numbor of advantage8 over a lawuit

. 'ADR can save timQ. A dispute oftncan be rosolVed In a mattr of month, 'oven

weeksl through ADR, whllø a IawsuJt can take years;

. ADR ciln save money. Court costs,3ttrneys fes, and expert feGS can be saved.

. . ADR can be cooperatie. This muos that the parties ha'(hig-a dispute may worktogether with the noutra to relve the dispute and agre toa,remedy that makessense to thorn, rather than work against each other. .., ' '

. ADR can reduce Str, There are fewerl I' any, court appearnces. And because .ADR can be speedlor, and save money, Bnd because the partes are normaBy

. cooperatie,' ADR.ls easleròn th nerVes. The p'artès donlt have a lawsuithanging over thl, høads for yøàrs. ,

. ADR encourages partclpatlon. Tho partes may have more çhançes to ten theirsIde of the story than In court and may have more çontrol over the outcome- .

. ADR Is nexlblø~ The parties can choose the AOR process that Is best for them.For example. In mediation th parties may decide how to reolve their dispute.

. ADR can be more satlsfng. For all the abovo roasonsl many people havereport a high degree of satisfaction with ADR.

ADR-i 101fT (Ia) p¡ii


-(.

At TERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION P'ROGRAMS,..Of the San Francisco Superior Court

"It Is the policy of the Superior Court that ever noncrminal, non juvenilecase participate eiter in an earJsetementconferenæ', mediation,arbittion, 'earl neutral evluation or some other alternative dispute

. resolution process prior to a mandatory settlementcanferenceor triaL."(SupeñorCourt loelRule 4) . ., ,This guide Is designed to assist attorneys~ their clients and sel ~preStedlitigants ¡ncomplying ,wi San FranclscoSupenor Court's altematiVe .disputeresolution ("ADR") policy. AttorneyS are encouraged to share thisguide'wih clients. By making informed choice about dispute reSolution .alternaties, atto.meys, . their clients and self -rprented litigants mayachieve a more satising resolution of. civl disputes.

, The San Francisco Superior Court currntly offers three ADR programs for.general'civ;i matters; each-program is.descrbed below:. .

1)2)3)

Judicial Arbitrtion..MediationThe Early Setemnt Proram (ESP) in CQnjunction:with theSan Francisc Bar Assiation.

JUDICIAL ARBITRTION

, Description

In arbitrt¡'on, a neutrl -arbrator" presides at a heariOg where thep8rtiespresnt evidence through exhibits ~ndtestimony_ The arbittor applfesthe

law to the fact ofthe case and makes an award based upon the merits of., theease. When the 'Court orders a cåse to arbaton it is called judicialarbitrtion. The goal of aritrtion is to provide partes with an adjudication

that is earlier, faster, less formal, and usually less expensive than a triaL.Upon stipulation of alt parties, other civil matters may ,be submitted tojùdicil artration. .Although not currently a part of the Court's ADR program, civil disputesmay also be resolved through private arbitration Here, the parties

ADIl. 10/07 (J) Pa 4


--

A mediator does not propose ajudgmerit or provide an evaJuationof themerits a'nd value of. the cae. Manyattomeys and litigants find that'mediation's emphasis on coopertive dispute resolution procJucesmoresatisfactory and endunng reslutions. MedIation's non-dversarial

. approach is partcularly efctve in dispu in which the pares have acontinuing relationship, where there are multíple partes, where equitablerelief is sought, 'or wher strong personal feelingsexisl . ..

Operaon

San Francisco Superir Court Local:CourtRule4 provIdes three dIfferentvoluntary n'odlaUon proras for ciil disputes. An appropriate programis available for all civil cases, regardless of the type of acton or type Of

relief sought,

. To help litigants andattomey ideti qualified mediators, ,the SuperiorCourt maintains a list of mediation providers wlosetrining ana exeriencehave been reviewed and approved by the Court The lis of court approved.mediation provider êan be found at ~.sfgov.org/court. . Litigants are. .not Iimite.d"to mediators on the courtUst and may select any .mediatoragreed upon by all partes. A mediation providerrieed not be an attorney. ..

Local Rule 4.2 0 allow fOr mediation ¡nlieu of judicial arbitation, 50 long

as the parties file a stipulation to mediate witin 240 days from the date thecomplaint is filed. If settlement is notreached through mediation, a, caproceeds, to trial as scheduled"

Private Mediation

The Priate Mediatin program accmmodates cases that Wish toparticipate, in pnvate mediatin to fuffllthe courtts alternatie dispute ..resolution reuirement. Th partes selec a medJator, panel of

mediators' or .

mediatin proram of their choice to conduct the mediation. The Cot ofmec:Uatfonis bomeby the partes equally unless the parties agreeotherwise. ." 'Partes in civil cases tha't have riot been ordered to arbittion may consentto private mediation at any point before tral. Partes willng to submit a

matter to private mediation should indicate this preference on the .Stipulation toAltemative Dispute Resolution form or the Case,Management.Statement (CM-11 0). Both forms are attached to this packet.

ADR-i IDI07 Gi) Pag 6


Cost

Generally, the cost of Private Mediation ranges. from .$200 per hour to $40per hour and is shared eaually.by the partes. Many mediators are willng toadjust their fee depeding upon the income and resouit of the parties.Any part who mee~rtineligibilit reuireents may ask the court to

. appoint.a mediator to serve at no cost to the parties.,

The Meiation Servces of the Bar Asation of San Francisco provideS

thre hours of mediation time at no cot with a $200 per part

administrtie fee. 'There is no.charge for participation in the Judicial Mediation program.

" 'EARLY SETMENT PROGRA

. . Døscrlptlon.' . . .' . .The Bar Assocation 'of San Francisco. in. coperation wi the Court; offers

an Early Settement Program ("ESP") as part of the Courts setement' .

conference calendiir. The goalofearJy settement is to provide partpants, an opportunit to .reach a mutally acptable seWernnt that resolves allor part of the dispute. Th tw-membervolunteet attorney panel reflec abalance between plainti and defense attorneys wit at least 10 years oftnaJ experience.

As in meiatin, there is no set format for the settlement conference. A ''conference tyically begins with a brief meetng With aU partes andcounsel, ¡n'which each is given an 'opportunit to make an initial sttementThe panelist then assist the paries in l,mderndlng and candidlydjscssing the stengths and weaknesse of th case. Th EarlySettlement Conferenc is considered a "quasi-udicial. procing and.

, therre, is not entiled to the statutory confidentiality protecons affrdedto mediation.

Opertion

Civil cases enter the ESP either voluntanly or through assignment by theCourt Parties who wish to choose the ealy setement proces should

indicate this preference on th sta~us and setting conference state~ent

ADR-i 10/07 Oil 1,.8


'- -'

SUPERIOR ,COURT OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO.

40 Mi:lilta Stret, san Francico. CA 94102-414

CalieNo.

PlöinSllPULAnON TO ALTENAT1VEDISPUlRESOLUnON

..

Ol!fendiint

Th¡¡ piirt herey aUpulàle that thIs açton shall bL! submlttd to the following iiltemaUvø dlaputøl'lioJutlon process: 'ooooo

Priate NedlaUon 0Bbidlng IirblttJon

Non-blndlng judloJaJ arbitrtion

BA8F early St!ttement ProgmOtherADR process (de.crl~ll)

, Mediation Serlç.i o"8ASF 0 JudIcIal M*Clation. JUdU8Judge

PlalnUft(s) and Døføndant(8) furter agr as follow:

Name of par 8tuløün Name of Pãay or Attey EXecg sllpûhiiln Signatu of Part or Atey

o plaTnIir 0 Derw 0 Cniiiøant Di

Namo of Part Stlpulatlng Name of Part or Attm"y mUng StpulaìJn slgnalû 0' i3art or Attory

o Pliilnl i: Deimt 0 Cr Dalø:

Name of Part or Aity EicuUng SlIullIUDn. SIgnature of Part or AtrnyNamø of Pørt Sllpulatlng

o P1alntir 0 Defødarl 0 Crii.nl Da:

o AdditInal &1gnatIJTl(!J) atched

SYIPULATION TO ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTIONAOR-2 3I


-- -,~

eM-1l0.

Ih '. r.1!fFF~ONi;DEFENOAIRN~.10. d.' Th ~ or paes all wiling to partte In (t: aU that øpply):. .'.(1) DMelalJn . ' . .

(2) 0 Noi1ng juallln unr Co ot elv Prour se 1141.12 (dicory to do 15 days befQ. aiitlion under Cal Rul of Có rule 3.82) ,

. (3) 0 NonInding Judllttii uner Code of CI proure secl 1141.12 (ciacÒveiy to remain op unW 30 days

bere Iris Or niul under Cal Ru of Coit rule 3.82)

(4) CJ Bfnifmgjudlcll albltrUo ' . .(S) 0 Binin prte iIcn(6 D N.w ça evueUanrn CJ Otii (sp

1--

Ii. 0 This maiir ii wbJed to man judial liiblln be the 8JlIt in mnlny does not exce !h sttuI) "mil .f. 0 Pbi ele to rérer \h ca toJudal ailin and Qgre to Umit reveryto thii am iilled In Coe of CMPrra sect 1141'1.' ,g. t: This ca Is exemt frjudidaliiitll unr rule 3.8110fths C~mla Rulea of Cort (spflÐmp):

11. Slittementconfl1ni;eo Th part or ~ aré wiling to p~~ in an eBl iilll ainfenc (8 whiJ):

, \

f2. tn~urnç.a. . 0 Insur ameri If any, for part fig this sttement (fU):

b.. Rellon of ri D Y81' 0 NO' "Co 0 Cor.gi 156S Wi,81!1nicari aff reluon OfthC3 (eKpin):

13. Jutl.dlCUon _IndlClte anmal1 thaI miiy af lh COrfs ju or prlns of this C4M. and dssabe the islu.

o Bankrlq . 0 otr (sp: .Status:, ,

14. Relate ÇI'" coMoUdaUon. and cordall

a CJ' There ar con, undeing. ii ~ed Ca(1) Niime of ca:(2 NaJn of cort

(3) Ca ni.(4) S1s: .

o Addllnal ~se ans deai: In AlIålment 148.

b. 0 A mollon to 0 ~nale. ,i= ooaie wnl be ii by (nam pa):

15. B1fßltJonCJ Th9 part or pai1lnnd 10 li a moon fo an Oret ~iæng. i;veii. Of cordlntling !he follo is.or cause ofacton (sp movi ps Iy 0' mo. øn ~: , .

16. OUør mQtonl

D Thè 'j,1t or parl ex tome the rtllowng moons before trBf (sp movi plrt ty of mo. lind Iss):

CUil\l p:. ~ i. ac ~~"'.CA MAGEMENT STATEEN


-r ',.

r ,

SuperiorCourt of Caliorna. CotLty of San Frarcico

HOM DAVI BALLTIPREJDINC:iJUpIl! ,Judicial Mediation Program Jai B. AlAR

ADRPlGR ADlINl8T TOR

. 'T Judicial Medon prgr offer metion of complex civil litigaon by a. Sìm Fracisco Supor CoUr judge famar wi the ar of th law that is the sujec.of th c:nteryi Caes th wi be consde fo pacipation.in th prgr .include, but ar no! li to prfesonal nice, constretoneIploymentince coerge diuts, ma tort,and.Comp1ex commeralliga~n. Judiciamedtion offer ci.liga th oprtty to engage in eaiy medon of a ca'shory af fig th compla in an effort to relve tbema befor sustfiai exded Ths prgr ~y al be uti at Bnethrougoutthe ., ,I ' ,litigaon pr. Th pael of jligeciy parcipatg in th prgr inclues:

Th Honorale David J'-,BallaTh Hoiioialc Ane BouJaneTh HonmbJc Ellen Cbti.

Th HonorablcRobert L. DondeThe HÓnomble Erest H. GoldsmiThe Honorale Harld E. KaThe Honorale Patrick J. MahneyThe'Honorable Tomar Ma .

The HöJoråle JameS J. McBride .The Ho.norale Kcvi'M. McCiuThe Honorale 10hn E. MunterThe 'Honorable Ronad QuidachayThe Honorale A- James Robern. n .

The Honoble John K. SteThe Honole Mai E. Wiss

. Pares intested injudicial medafIi shuld fie the Stipulaton to AlteveDispu Reoluon fom atted to th packet incag a jojnt ret for inlusonin"the progr and delive a cosy copy to De. 212. A preference

fu a specifc

judge may be incate lhe co Alve ~pue Reoluton PrgrAdministto wil failta assignent of cases tht qua for the progr

Note: Space. is lited Subiion of a stpulon to judci medhrton. do notgu inclusion in the progr. You wi reive wrtt notication from thecour as to the out of your aplicaon.

. Supor Cour Altcre Disp Reoluton400 MMlst Str Roo 103, San Frcis. CA 94 i 02

(415) 551~3876

10J Gil)
