Latest news with #CaliforniaFairEmploymentandHousingAct
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Vin Diesel's Lawyer Speaks Out After Latest Ruling in Sexual Battery Case with Ex-Assistant (Exclusive)
In December 2023, Vin Diesel was sued by a former assistant who claimed the actor sexually assaulted her in September 2010, which Diesel denies The judge in the case dismissed some of the former assistant's claims connected to California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) Diesel's lawyer Bryan Freedman said they'll next present evidence that the remaining allegations are "fictitious"Vin Diesel scored a legal win in his continued court battle with an ex-assistant who accused him of sexual assault. Back in December 2023, Asta Jonasson, a former assistant to Diesel, filed a sexual battery lawsuit in Los Angeles against the Fast & Furious actor over an alleged 2010 incident at an Atlanta hotel. On Tuesday, June 3, Judge Daniel M. Crowley made a tentative ruling in the case, dismissing the first four causes of action that had to do with the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA): discrimination in violation of FEHA; hostile work environment in violation of FEHA; retaliation in violation of FEHA; failure to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation in violation of FEHA. "Plaintiff's FEHA claims are time-barred because she failed to timely exhaust her administrative remedies by filing a CRD complaint within one year of the alleged adverse action, a jurisdictional requirement for a FEHA lawsuit," Judge Crowley wrote in the tentative ruling, viewed by PEOPLE. Diesel's lawyer Bryan Freedman says in an exclusive statement to PEOPLE on June 3, "It is unfortunate that a person who worked for the company for less than two weeks 15 years ago in another state is allowed to use the California court system to assert such baseless claims." "The court today granted our client's motion in full dismissing half of this frivolous case," continues Freedman, who separately also represents Justin Baldoni in the ongoing It Ends With Us legal battle with Blake Lively. "Next, we will present irrefutable evidence that the remaining fictitious allegations alleged herein did not occur and finally end what remains of this maliciously filed lawsuit," claimed Freedman. Matthew T. Hale, an attorney for Jonasson, says in a statement to PEOPLE, "While we respectfully disagree with the court's decision on this limited legal issue, the court made no factual findings that impact the remaining causes of action in this case." "We will continue to advocate vigorously on behalf of our client, who remains committed to seeking justice," adds Hale. Six of Jonasson's causes of action remain: retaliation in violation of Labor Code §1102.5; retaliation in violation of Labor Code §98.6; wrongful termination in violation of public policy; sexual battery; negligent supervision and retention; and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In her complaint, Jonasson said she was hired by Diesel's production company One Race Films to assist him on location in Atlanta, where his team was filming 2011's Fast Five. She alleged that Diesel forcibly pulled her onto a bed, groped her breasts and legs and masturbated at a hotel in Atlanta in September 2010, and that she was fired the next day. After news of the lawsuit in December 2023, Freedman said in a statement, "Let me be very clear: Vin Diesel categorically denies this claim in its entirety." He added at the time, "This is the first [Diesel] has ever heard about this more than 13-year-old claim made by a purportedly nine-day employee. There is clear evidence which completely refutes these outlandish allegations." Read the original article on People
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Jury returns win for Levi Strauss in sex discrimination case
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. Dive Brief: A California jury on Monday cleared retailer Levi Strauss of sex discrimination charges filed by a former executive (Bois v. Levi Strauss & Co.), finding she did not prove her sex and pregnancy were substantial motivating factors for her lack of promotion. The executive, who was hired as a manager in 2012 and promoted to director level by 2017, alleged in a June 2023 complaint that she was passed over for further promotions due to her pregnancy, gender, and age, while eight other colleagues with less or equal experience in the role were promoted around her. She also alleged violations of the Equal Pay Act. Last July, a judge tossed the worker's age discrimination and equal pay claims, finding she provided no evidence for the former and the latter law did not apply, but allowed the other claims to proceed to a trial. Dive Insight: The former executive, who resigned from her role in 2023, filed her lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the California Equal Pay Act. It proceeded to trial on several Title VII and FEHA claims, with the other charges being thrown out. The jury reached its verdict after a brief deliberation, according to court documents. In her complaint, the former executive alleged her manager passed her over for a promotion shortly after she disclosed her pregnancy, saying the decision was due to her 'work capacity,' which she took to be a thinly veiled reference to her pregnancy and the subsequent leave and obligations of raising an infant. In a response to the complaint filed with the court in July 2023, Levi Strauss denied these allegations, along with the others; however, the judge found genuine dispute of material fact warranting a trial. The outcome is somewhat unusual for an employment law case. Employers often choose to settle in advance of a trial, due to the trial's potential cost and the perception that jurors tend to side with employee plaintiffs — among other reasons. HR Dive coverage of recent jury verdicts includes a $300,000 award for a SkyWest Airlines parts clerk who endured sexual harassment (brought down from $2.7 million), a $22.1 million award to a Wells Fargo director who was laid off after a work-from-home accommodation request, and a $12.7 million award to a Catholic worker who was refused a religious exemption for a COVID-19 vaccination and then fired. Neither Levi Strauss & Co. nor an attorney for the plaintiff immediately responded to requests for comment.
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Former OAN anchor settles complaint alleging co-worker accused her of being a Hitler supporter
A former anchor for One America News has settled a complaint with the far-right network that alleges she was subjected to a hostile work environment, discrimination, harassment, and wrongful termination. In her complaint, Jessamyn Dodd also claims that another co-worker 'falsely reported' to the network's human resources director that Dodd was 'essentially a Neo-Nazi and Adolph Hitler supporter,' an allegation she said was 'patently false and especially offensive' considering her Jewish heritage. Dodd, who worked as a weekend anchor for the Trump-boosting channel from August 2022 until she was fired in the fall of 2023, claimed in her suit that after she complained to the network about her colleague's 'discriminatory conduct' and the hostility it created in the workplace, OAN eventually terminated her in retaliation rather than remedy the situation. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed, and Dodd declined to comment other than to say that the case had been resolved and she was satisfied. Filed earlier this year in San Diego County Superior Court, near One America News' headquarters, Dodd named OAN writer Katie Smith and Herring Network — the corporate parent of the channel – as defendants in the complaint. 'After becoming one of Defendants' most reliable anchors, DODD was subjected to workplace racism and discriminatory treatment by her coworker KATIE SMITH, including false accusations that DODD was a Neo-Nazi supporter — claims that were especially offensive given DODD's Jewish heritage,' the complaint stated. 'When DODD complained about the hostile work environment, DEFENDANT HERRING NETWORKS, INC. failed to take any remedial action and instead terminated her employment in retaliation.' In addition to her allegations of workplace harassment and discrimination, Dodd also accused the network of wage theft and unlawful employment practices under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, claiming that the company failed to provide proper meal and rest periods and furnish compliant wage statements. 'DODD was regularly forced to work through breaks due to understaffing and a demanding schedule that required her to prepare and anchor multiple shows per day without adequate support staff,' the complaint asserted. 'When DODD requested accommodations and complained about these violations, DEFENDANT HERRING NETWORKS, INC. responded dismissively and failed to take any corrective action.' Noting that she is 'a multi-racial woman of African American, Caucasian, and Jewish descent,' Dodd said in her complaint that throughout her employment, she was 'subjected to a hostile work environment, including workplace racism and snide comments from Defendant Smith, a Caucasian woman who worked alongside' Dodd. At one point, according to the complaint, Dodd alleged that Smith told the network's human resources accounting and payroll director and other co-workers that Dodd was 'essentially a Neo-Nazi and Adolph Hitler supporter — claims that were patently false and especially offensive given PLAINTIFF's Jewish heritage' Claiming that the 'false statements severely damaged' her professional and personal reputation 'by knowingly and maliciously disseminating and/or publishing false statements' that disparaged her character, Dodd accused the network of brushing off her complaints about Smith's behavior. 'Instead, shortly after PLAINTIFF's complaints, DEFENDANT HERRING terminated her employment in retaliation, in explicit violation of California law and public policy,' the complaint stated. Prior to her termination, Dodd claimed she was continually overworked and the network refused to allow her to take 'proper rest breaks' throughout her employment at OAN. She also said in the complaint that she was forced to take on additional roles due to the network's inability to retain staff. 'The lack of breaks stemmed from DEFENDANT HERRING's continuous understaffing and high turnover rate, which forced PLAINTIFF to perform numerous tasks outside her job description without additional compensation,' the complaint alleged. 'PLAINTIFF requested more coverage and accommodations on numerous occasions, such as co-hosts for her shows or longer break periods between shows, but these requests were never granted.' The suit continued: 'When PLAINTIFF addressed the lack of breaks and the resulting mental and physical fatigue, her supervisors and coworkers responded disparagingly, claiming she should not worry since 'no one even watches the news on weekends.'' Representatives for One America News and Smith did not immediately respond to a request for comment. OAN, which now has an almost non-existent footprint on television after losing all its major cable carriers, is no stranger to settling lawsuits. Last year, the network settled the defamation case brought by voting software firm Smartmatic, which accused the hard-right channel of trumpeting baseless conspiracy theories that voting machines rigged the 2020 election against Donald Trump. The network also reached a settlement in September 2023 with a former Dominion Voting Machines executive over false claims that he and Dominion had engaged in a massive election fraud scheme. Additionally, as part of a 2022 settlement agreement with two Georgia election workers caught up in vote-rigging conspiracy theories, OAN ran a segment acknowledging there was 'no widespread voter fraud' in the 2020 election.
The Independent
25-03-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Former OAN anchor settles complaint alleging co-worker accused her of being a Hitler supporter
A former anchor for One America News has settled a complaint with the far-right network that alleges she was subjected to a hostile work environment, discrimination, harassment, and wrongful termination. In her complaint, Jessamyn Dodd also claims that another co-worker 'falsely reported' to the network's human resources director that Dodd was 'essentially a Neo-Nazi and Adolph Hitler supporter,' an allegation she said was 'patently false and especially offensive' considering her Jewish heritage. Dodd, who worked as a weekend anchor for the Trump-boosting channel from August 2022 until she was fired in the fall of 2023, claimed in her suit that after she complained to the network about her colleague's 'discriminatory conduct' and the hostility it created in the workplace, OAN eventually terminated her in retaliation rather than remedy the situation. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed, and Dodd declined to comment other than to say that the case had been resolved and she was satisfied. Filed earlier this year in San Diego County Superior Court, near One America News' headquarters, Dodd named OAN writer Katie Smith and Herring Network — the corporate parent of the channel – as defendants in the complaint. 'After becoming one of Defendants' most reliable anchors, DODD was subjected to workplace racism and discriminatory treatment by her coworker KATIE SMITH, including false accusations that DODD was a Neo-Nazi supporter — claims that were especially offensive given DODD's Jewish heritage,' the complaint stated. 'When DODD complained about the hostile work environment, DEFENDANT HERRING NETWORKS, INC. failed to take any remedial action and instead terminated her employment in retaliation.' In addition to her allegations of workplace harassment and discrimination, Dodd also accused the network of wage theft and unlawful employment practices under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, claiming that the company failed to provide proper meal and rest periods and furnish compliant wage statements. 'DODD was regularly forced to work through breaks due to understaffing and a demanding schedule that required her to prepare and anchor multiple shows per day without adequate support staff,' the complaint asserted. 'When DODD requested accommodations and complained about these violations, DEFENDANT HERRING NETWORKS, INC. responded dismissively and failed to take any corrective action.' Noting that she is 'a multi-racial woman of African American, Caucasian, and Jewish descent,' Dodd said in her complaint that throughout her employment, she was 'subjected to a hostile work environment, including workplace racism and snide comments from Defendant Smith, a Caucasian woman who worked alongside' Dodd. At one point, according to the complaint, Dodd alleged that Smith told the network's human resources accounting and payroll director and other co-workers that Dodd was 'essentially a Neo-Nazi and Adolph Hitler supporter — claims that were patently false and especially offensive given PLAINTIFF's Jewish heritage' Claiming that the 'false statements severely damaged' her professional and personal reputation 'by knowingly and maliciously disseminating and/or publishing false statements' that disparaged her character, Dodd accused the network of brushing off her complaints about Smith's behavior. 'Instead, shortly after PLAINTIFF's complaints, DEFENDANT HERRING terminated her employment in retaliation, in explicit violation of California law and public policy,' the complaint stated. Prior to her termination, Dodd claimed she was continually overworked and the network refused to allow her to take 'proper rest breaks' throughout her employment at OAN. She also said in the complaint that she was forced to take on additional roles due to the network's inability to retain staff. 'The lack of breaks stemmed from DEFENDANT HERRING's continuous understaffing and high turnover rate, which forced PLAINTIFF to perform numerous tasks outside her job description without additional compensation,' the complaint alleged. 'PLAINTIFF requested more coverage and accommodations on numerous occasions, such as co-hosts for her shows or longer break periods between shows, but these requests were never granted.' The suit continued: 'When PLAINTIFF addressed the lack of breaks and the resulting mental and physical fatigue, her supervisors and coworkers responded disparagingly, claiming she should not worry since 'no one even watches the news on weekends.'' OAN, which now has an almost non-existent footprint on television after losing all its major cable carriers, is no stranger to settling lawsuits. Last year, the network settled the defamation case brought by voting software firm Smartmatic, which accused the hard-right channel of trumpeting baseless conspiracy theories that voting machines rigged the 2020 election against Donald Trump. The network also reached a settlement in September 2023 with a former Dominion Voting Machines executive over false claims that he and Dominion had engaged in a massive election fraud scheme. Additionally, as part of a 2022 settlement agreement with two Georgia election workers caught up in vote-rigging conspiracy theories, OAN ran a segment acknowledging there was 'no widespread voter fraud' in the 2020 election.
