SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL DJSTRlCT

7 8

!IS.

BONONI LAW GROUP, LLP

William S, Waldo (State Bar No. 073973)

1 Michael 1. Benoni (State Bar No. 130663)

915 Wilshire Boulevard, Suire 19:50

3 Los Angeles, California 90017

Telephone: (213) 553-9200

4 . Facsimile: (2lJ) 553-9215

5 Attorneys fer Plaintiff Kayden Nguyen

9

10 ,

11

KAYDENNG YE>J. all individual, Plaintiff,

£2

11

14

16 17 18

i9

20

----------------------------------

21

22

Case No.

COMPLAINT FOR VA MAC ES:

1. st, l AL I-IAR..L\SSMENT;

2. rLLE_ AI" TRAI7FJCKING OF .tALES F~' ~. ";

J lTA LURE T - . ~ (tiT

SE~ VA HARASS. -'.NT; RETAL TION;

WRO _ ' llL TERM NAT J'''i OLA _" ION OF PUBL ~~~(CY;A~!~------

Q. FALSE REPRESENTATIONS

. ~ 1PLOYMKNT

DEMAND FOR JURY THJAL

23

Plaintiff alleges as follows on knowledge as to hersel f and her own acts, and on

information and belief as to all other matters:

24

')_:)

26

27

28

-~---.-. ---~~=~~

PLAINTlFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

L

1: INTRODUCTION

3 In February 2010; Plaintiff Kayden Nguyen ("Nguyen"'), a 23 year old former mode ,

-4 noticed a Craigslist ad for an executive assistant job at a production company. 1s.lguyen

5 responded to the ad and included a photograph with her resume.

6 Ms. ?--:guyn was repeatedly interviewed over the next three days. She was told that the

7 job involved standard clerical functions as the xecutive Assistant for Steven Scagal C-Seagar') 8 and his production company 15. Nguyen was told that she would be replacing another

9 individual v. ho had recently quit. At th end of her last interview, Mr. Seagal told Ms. Nguyen 10 to fun home and pllck so she could board a private plane to New Orleans later that afternoon with 11 Mr. Seagal and the production crew of his television show "Steven Seagal Lawman:'

"t;, yen arrived in New Orleans she learned that the job she was expected to

12
13
14- Sea I t h
15
J6
17
18 . Nguyen learned that ML

n taff who were av ilable

ho had

19 20 _1

"massage." He then proceeded to treat Ms. Nguyen as his sex toy. Mr. Seagal s ph::. sical and

sexual a sault of Ms. Nguyen that night. over her objections, included:

Pushing his hands under her shin and attempting to fondle her barebreasts.

24 25

26

F arcing he head against his bare chest.

27

28

PL INTIFl"S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

!lONONI L,HV ,ROlli'

1

eO!"ON! LAW GROUP

Grabbing her leg and forcing it over his body, . 1ci then forcing his hand down her pants between her bare buttocks

3

4

Responding to Ms. guyens terror with the order to "relax:' "we word

5

do anything special tonight. I'll save that for another night."

6

Reminding Ms. Nguyen as she fled, "remember confidentiality. )'01.1

7 8 9

aren't allowed to tell anybody. , . ."

1 0 Ms. Nguyen immediately complained the next morning. In order to "keep the star

11 happy," nothing was said or don.

12 her complaint, Mr. Seagal physically sexually assaulted Ms. Nguyen for

13 ]4 15 16 17 18

19

20

loudly that he stopped.

1

22

•

Forced her to consume illegal pills before he let her lea 'e.

23

24

The following morning when Ms. Nguyen immediately complained for the second lime,

she was told she had to talk to Mr. Seagal. When Ms. Nguyen spoke with Mr. Seagal as ordered.

26

he claimed that there was a "misunderstanding:'

27

28

PLAINTfFF'S COMPLAL'JT FOR DAMAGES

2

--------------------~---------_----- --

1

3 4

Mr. Seagal's third physical sexual assault of Ms. guyen occurred only a few hours after her second complaint. Mr. Seagal forcibly lifted Ms. Nguyen's blouse. forced his head on her bare chest and attempted to suck her breasts and nipples. He slopped only when sh ran.

In order to escap from the house, on Sunday: February 28, 2010. Ms. Nguyen told Me Seagal that she was meeting family members visiting from out or state. Mr. Seagal initially told her she couldn't leave the house. She told him thai it would look suspicious if she did not at

5

6

7

least see her family members for a few hours, and called a cab.

8

A fter trying for almost three hours to persuade a cab to come 10 the remote house ne

9

finally pulled into the driveway at around [ 1 :00 p.m.

s Ms .. ~guye ran to the cab. Mr. Seagal followed a few steps behind, shining a

10 11

flashlight. with a gun attached to It.

nped into the front seat of the cab and begged th driver to get her away

.'!

L:.

l4 s c 1. fea r
15 her car keys.
16
17 assaults, he
18
19 returned.
20
21 n.

PARTIES

22

23

At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff Kayden Nguyen ('PI ainti ff or

1.

24 "Ngu en"). was a California employee of Defendants and a resident of'the County of Los

25 Angeles, State of California.

26

Defendant Steven Seagal ("Seagal"') is both an individual and employer who at all

2.

27 times mentioned in this omplaint resided in, was an employer in, and had his principal place { f 28 business in, the Co un ty 0 f Los Angel es, State 0 f C a 1j fornia,

PLMNTIFF S COMPLAINT FOR DA1V[4.GE

3

nO~Q~II.c\W GROUP

8

G.

1\1 ali times mentioned herein, Defendant Mojo Priest. Inc. ("'Mojo Priest") was

3. At all times mentioned herein, Mr. Seagal was 'lID employee and/or agent of the

2 other Defendants herein. and in doing the things hereinafter alleged. was acting, at least. in nan, 3 within the course, scope, and authority of such relationship,

4.

At alJ times mentioned herein, Defendant Steamroller Productions was and is II

5 corporation and/or limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of

6' California, and having it principal place of business in the Count) of Los Angeles, Stut~ of 7 California.

5,

On information and belief, at all times mentioned herein, Mr. Seagal was an

9 employee, owner, officer, director, andlor managing agent of Defendant Steamroller

J 0 • Produnlons.

II

12 .a.nd is a cotpol'at~ar1ized under the laws of (he State of Cal lfornia, and having it princi pal

13 ]4

15

employee, ower. officer. ,d7or. or m ging age

8. -'lar "s inform d and believ .;m . based thereoh alle: es, that Defer dants

16

17

18 19 20

disregarding the corporate entity and deeming each of the Defendants' acts to be those of the other individual and/or corporate Defendants. and warranting the application of the "auer ego" doctrine to the conduct of Defendants Segal, Steamroller Productions, and/or Mojo Priest.

22

9

Plaintiff is, informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all material times

24 herein mentioned, each of the Defendants named in the caption and each DOE Defendant was an

25 agent, employee and/or partner ol'the remaining Defendants, including the DOE Defendants,

26 and, in doing the things herein alleged, was acting within the scope of such agency, employment 27 and/or partnership with the permission, authority and consent of his or her co-Defendants.

28

PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FB;Oi"i"Rn. TD"A'"M~A7', ,"'"G;'i";E;r;S--------

4

10. Plainriffis informedand believes and thereon alleges that each busines-s entity of

2 Defendants. whether corporate, partnership, joint venture, unincorporated association. public

3 entity, or other business entity of unknown form, and whether named or sued by fictitious name, 4 is. and, at an times mentioned herein was, in some manner involved in the ownership and/or

5 operation of the Defendant corporations herein. Each of the individual Defendants, whether

6 named or sued by fictitious name. whether acting inan individual capacity or within or without

7 their capacity as managerial agent, servant, employee, officer, director, partner, or joint venturer

8 of each of the business entity of Defendants aforementioned, in committing the acts or omissions 9 as alleged herein whie:h resulted in damage to Plaintiff, is and at all times mentioned herein was

10 also in some manner involved in the ownership andlor operation of said Defendant corporations. 11 if any, and in doing the things herein alleged was acting with the permission and consent and/or

12 . nor ratification of each of the business entity Defendants mentioned

13

15 DOES 1 throu

16 Plailitiff will

of said D€f1ndanL ereon ~tlege'$ t 'at

17 18 19

20 Defendants as well.

21

22

HI.

FACTUALALLEG ATIONS

J'" _J

24

26

12. 13.

Ms. Nguyen is a 23~year old female.

Ms. Nguyen has financially supported herself since she was 18 years old. through

27 a variety of full and part-time jobs. She was an aspiring professional model. In february 20 r 0\ 28 she was enrolled in college where she was studying to be an air traffic controller.

I'L.AJNTIFI"S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

5

IlfJNONI.LAW GROUP'

15

14. On Friday, February 19,2010, Ms. Nguyen sent her resume and photograph in

'2 response to a posting she noticed on Craigslist fOT an Executive Assistant job \vhich read:

.3 "Executive/Personal Assistant Wanted

4 Executi ve/Personal Assi stant wanted. Home office in L.A hut will also be

5 working on a reality tv. show in NeW Orleans I..A. On-set expenence

6 and foreign languages a plus but not a must.

7 Please email resume's to!

8 ForBinh@gmail.com" (emphasis adc ed.)

9 Within a couple f hours of sending her resume and picture to ForBinh@gmaiLcom.

10 Ms. Iguyen recei ed an email reply from Binh Dang CDang"), an executive from Steamroller

I 1 Preductions Mr. Dang asked Ms. Nguyen to give him her telephone number.

12 15. p.m. on Saturday, February 20.20! 0, Mr. Dang telephoned Ms. Nguyen,

13 In that ccnvezsaucn, anb told her that the job advertised on qraigslist was Steven Seagal',:;

14

16

17

18 New Orleans.

19

16.

e had reviewed her

20 resume and that she was fully qualified for the Executive Assistant job. At the end of the

21 conversation, Mr. Dang told M .. Nguyen that the next step was an interview with Ir. Scagal on

22 Monday, February 22,2010. He promised to call her later that weekend with further details.

23

17

At approximately 10:00 p.m, on Sunday, February 21, 2010, Mr. Dang called Ms.

24 Nguyen and told her that Shaun Fischer ('Fischer"), who was in his last week as Mr. Seagal's 25 Executive Assistant, would call her iu the morning of Monday, February 22,201 \) with the final 26 details about where and wh n she would interview with Mr. Seagal.

27

18.

When Mr. Escher called shortly before noon on Monday, February 2010, he totd

28 Ms. Nguyen to meet Mr. Seagal at 1,;30 p.m, at One Olvera Street, Los Angeles, California,

PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DA MAG"'. E:;"CS::---------

6

4

24.

Mr. Seagals "final interview" consisted of only one question, "Are you sure YOLI

1 where the camera crew was shooting a promo for the "Steven Seagal Lawman" television show,

1 When Ms. Nguyen asked Mr. Fischer about the next step after (he inter, iew, Mr. Fischer asked, 3 "Would you be willing to hop on a plane right after? We would need you immediately."

19.

At approximately 1:25 p.rn., Mr. Fischer called Ms. Nguyen and changed the-

5 location of her job interview with Mr. Seagal to 426 North Los Angeles Street, LOlNo. 4.

6

10.

When Mr. Seagal interviewed Ms. Iguyen around 3:00 p.m. he asked standard

7 questions about her experience. other jobs she had held, and her training.

8

At the end of the interview, Mr. Seagal said, "'1 like you, so we're gl1ing to k ep

9 you. We; 11 send a driver to your hOUSt~ so you can drop off your car. I'I I interview you one

10 mote tune before we hop on the plane. If I J ike you. we' II take you. If not, we' 11 have the driver

1'1 take you back hf)me:'

12

22.

Uc;:Jefmhts' limousine followed Ms. Nguyen horne from the job interview and ~_ .. m three minutes packing whatever she uM throw in her suitcase.

13

14 2

15

16 ] 7

18 You cannot tell any.one, lot e en ~Uf family, who you are working for or 'what you are doing, 19 do you unders~e,J '\ 1 10 jet for her "final interview" with Mr. Seagal, Seated one rowaway from Mr. Seagai during the 21 interview was Simon Hobbs, a producer from lTV Studios one of Mr, Seagal's business partners 22 in production of "Steven Seagal Lawman."

23

24 wouldn't mind helping my wife around the house if she asked you to do something?" While the 15 question seemed strange given me description of the Executive Assistant clerical job duties she 26 had been given> Ms. Nguyen replied, 'I would have no problem helping your wife ifshe needed 27 it.'·}..-1r. Seagal then signaled Mr. Fischer that it was okay for the jet to take off. Ms. Nguyen

28 believed that she. bad found the dream job ofa lifetime.

PLAIN IFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMA-'-G;;=;"'EC<S---~----

7

9011101'11 LAW CROl'l'

25. As the jet taxied down the runway. Mr. Seagal turned to Ms. Nguyen and said.

"I'm a family man, and l live with my wife, but she wouldn't care if you were my lover.' Ms. 3 Nguyen was startled) and gave 1L Seagal a look of disbelief. Mr. eagal continued, "My wife 4 I wouldn't mind if you and I had a sexual relationship: Those words left Mr. Seagals mouth as 5 the jet lifted off the runway.

6

26.

Ms. Nguyen's concerns about the Executive Assistant job grew when she was

7 told during the flight that in New Orleans, she would be required to live in the ss me house with 8 Mr. eagal. Believing that the whole production staff, male and female, would live in that

9 house, Ms. Nguyen decided to take a wait and see attitude.

]0

27.

1'1 e passengers en the private jet from Los Angeles to New Orleans included

11 outgoing E. eeuuve Assistant Fischer, Fischer's newly hired replacement Vanes a Johnson

sian female appro imately ! 9 years old named "Sasha" [pseudo name

13 used to protest pti a Q Mr. Seagal introduced as his "Attend~nr" On information and

N belief th {hel' pas engel's ere four members of the ITV tudios production ~r v, in addition 15

16

17 morning. Ms.

18 29,

e arrived at the

20 house, Ms. Nguyen learned that the only employees who were required £0 live in the same house

2 [ with Mr. Seagat were his two young Russian female "Attendants" and Mg Ngu en. The male

22 production staff and Executive Assistant Johnson li ved in separate housing away from Mr.

23 Seagal,

24

30.

Once at the hou e, Ms. Nguyen was introduced to a second attractive young

25 Russian female named "Naiasha" (pseudo name used to protect privacy). and told that "Natasha" 26 had just given notice and Was leaving the next week,

27 III 28 11/

PLAlNTIFF'S COM}'LAJNT FOR DAMAGES

8

BONONI LAW GROUP

4

36.

31, The house that Ms. Nguyen was required to live in with Mr. Seagal was located at

2 1668 Jean Lafitte Boulevard, Lafitte, Louisiana 70067. The house is not only located in a very remote rural area, it sits back more than one quarter mite from the road.

The house had two stories. The downstairs had an office, a family/living room, a

5 dining room, a kitchen with a breakfast nook area, and a master bedroom with jts own bathroom,

6 Mr. Seagal slept by himself in the only downstairs bedroom.

7

33.

The upstairs of the house had only bedrooms, bathrooms, and closets,

8 Mr. Seagal's wife and baby slept in one upstairs bedroom. The baby's nanny slept in another 9 upstairs bedroom. Attendants "Sasha" and "Natasha" shared one upstairs bedroom. Ms.

10 Nguyen's "bedroom' was upstairs, but it did not have a door. The room 'was separated from the

11 hallway by red curtains which could be pulled back to expose the bed and the rest of the room.

121

13 Se gal for p~rmi$slo,,__-,:o upstairs to go to bed. Mr. Seagal sign led that lht_;y could go.

14 15 16 17 18

20

'_',,,v.·.vx1tnately 2:00 a.m., Ms. Nguyen and Attendant "Sasha' asked Mr.

7.

Ms. Nguyen had received formal training as an BA therapist. and assumed that

11 the "massage' Mr. Seagal expected Was a professional therapeutic massage.

22

24

26

27

28

Upon arriving at his bedroom) Mr. Seagal sprawled across his bed on his stomach.

38.

Ms. Nguyen then noticed that Attendant "Sasha" was completely nude, with only a bathrobe draped loosely over her body. Ms. Nguyen was aghast as "Sasha' began massaging

Mr. Seagal's testicles as he rubbed his bands over "Sasha's" bare brea: ts. As Ms. Nguyen began timidly massaging Mr. Seagal' s legs, he lunged toward her chest and forced his hands under her

top and onto her hare nipples. As Ms. Nguyen pulled Mr. Seagal's hand off her breasts, he

PLAIJ"lTlFF'S cOMPLAilli1\'Ni"iliFG'lQ">1Rn. nD"A:-iM,7A'-:G~+"'E~S---·-----

9

'BONONI LA'! OnQl.lp

....

J

, and answering the telephone as had been

reached his band T ward Ms. Nguyen 1 5 head and dragged her head to his bare chest as he ordered

2 "Sasha' to leave.

39 .

Ms. Nguyen war. terrified as Mr. Seagal grabbed her leg, put it over his body, and

4 forced his hand down her bare buttocks, As Ms. guyen pushed herself away from "'f I'. Seagal,

5 be said "relax, we won't do anything special tonight. I'll save that for another night."

40,

As Ms. Nguyen retreated to her room. Mr. Seagal said, "Remember

6

7 confidentiality. You aren't allowed to tell anybody, including your family anything about me."

8 Ms. Nguyen's workday 'which had begun in .os Angeles finally ended when he got to her

9 bedroom at appr ximately 4:00 a.m, on February 13~ 2010. She had a sleepless night.

10

41.

In the early afternoon of Tuesday, February 23, 2010, Ms. Nguyen went to rhe

II Iflce in the house and attempted to perform the "Executive Assistant" job duties th t she was

12 wld she would b

ag when she took the job. As soon as Ms. Nguyen walked into the office, ~ .. ~at she (' Johnson"), not Nguyen. had been hired to replace

e Assistant." Ms. Johnson :al that she didn't need and

13 M .. Jchnsonann

14 Mr.Fisc

16 42.

.ssistantj amc eJ. few hours ff.ltct,

17

) 8 standard clerical .

19 represented to

20 comments that Ms. Nguyen should an wer the phones because Ms. Johnson had a . peech

21 impediment. Ms. Nguyen then complained to Mr. Fischer at length about ML Seagal's sexual 22 assault he previous night. be told Mr. Fischer that she wouldn't have taken any job if she had 13 been told that the job duties included giving sex to Mr. Seagai, She was emphatic that under no

24 circumstances was she going to give him sex or put up with any s xual assault. ML Fi cher said

25 he would talk to both Mr. Dang and Mr. Seagal about her complaint.

26

Ms. Nguyen's complaint notwithstanding, later that night, Mr. Se(,lgaJ ordered

43.

27 Ms. Nguyen and "Sasha' 10 watch TV in the downstairs family/living room with him. At 28 approximately 2:00 a.rn. on Wednesday, February 24, OlO, Mr. Seagal announced that he

PLAJNTIFF'S COM,l)LAlf'r FOR DAMAGES

10

80/ll0NIlAW GROUP

J \' anted another "massage" and motioned to Ms. Nguyen ami "Sasha" to follow him to hi

2 b droorn. Believing that in re pease to her complaint earlier that day. both Mr, Fischer and

3 Mr. Dang had made it dear to Mr. Seagal that she wasn't going to tolerate his sexual assaults, 4 she agreed to give him a leg massage.

5

44.

Once in Mr. Seagal's bedroom "Sasha" began massaging _ r. Seagal's back as

6 Ms. Nguyen massaged his legs. After approximately 70 minutes, Mr. Seagal abruptly ordered 7 "Sasha" to leave. As soon as' Sasha' exited the bedroom and before she could escape.

g Mr. Seagal began a icious sexual attack on Ms. Nguyen. Mr. Seagal held her right fool clown

9 with his leg, and pUl)hed ber left knee up with his right hand. Mr. Seagal then forced his hand

10 into -I. Nguyen's vagina. As Ms. Nguyen began sobbing, Mr. Seagal became sexually aroused

11 and had a unique physiological reaction to sexual arousal,

12

"~""'b""yen can and will describe in great detail Mr. Seagal's unique

i5,

13

__ ... exual arousal. Other females who have ecn present when Mr. S agal

15 knowledge ab·

16 17

46.

18 took the pills, Mr. Seagal handed her

19 a bottle of wat

20

As soon as she could get QUt. the doorway from Mr. Seagal, Ms. Nguyen ran to

47.

2 l her room. Her "work day" did not end until approximately 4:00 a.m. on 'Wednesday, February 22 24,. 2010 when she finally crawled into bed.

23

48.

Ms. Nguyen could not sleep at all that night, and telephoned Mr. Dang in the

24

morning of Wednesday, February 24, 2010 to complain directly to him. Ms. Nguyen told

Mr. Dang, "You hired me as an Executive Assistant, and lied to me about {he job, ,. ~'r . Ngu. en told Ir. Dang that the Executive Assistant ad was a fraud, and that what the production

26

27 company really wanted was an "Attendant" to provide sex on demand 10 Mr. SeagaJ because 28/ "Natasha' bad quit on short notice,

PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR nAJ~1AGES

11

lIO;l/ONI l,,\ W GROt'P

5

BONO 'I LAW l:;RuliP

49. Ms. Nguyen told Mr. Dang the details about Mr. Seagals sexual assaults the two

2 previous nights, that she had complained about it to Mr. Fischer tl e day before and was assured 3 that it would be taken care of, but that Mr. Seagal made an even more vicious sexual assault only 4 a few hours later.

50.

Mr. Dang continued lying to Ms. Nguyen; claiming that she had been hired to

6 perform the clerical duties of Executive Assistant. Mr. Dang told Ms. Nguyen that if she had a 7 problem with Mr. Seagal, she needed to talk to NfL S agal herself.

8 51. Because Mr. Dang one of the high level producers on ~ teven Seagal Lawman. 9 had given her an order to deal directly with the perpetrator of the sexual assaults if she wanted

10 them to top. Ms. Nguyen immediately approached Mr. Seagal, Ms. Nguyen told Mr. Seagai

11 that she wasn't hired as one of his -' Attendants" like "Sasha" or 'Natasha.' that she wasn't going

12 to gi e him sex at she could not and would not take his assaults anymore. Mr. Seagal

13 claimed it was all "a~_III.'

14 5 iguyen told Mr. 'i'i;ch~r that

15 she didn't wan

16 she would be 17 18

19 20 2] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

53.

she was required to continue living in the same house with Mr. Seagal,

54, At approximately 2;00 a.rn. in the morning of Thursday, February 10, 20}O,

Ms. Nguyen attempted to go to bed in her own room. As she was leaving to go upstairs, Mr. Seagal demanded a "massage.' When Ms. Nguyen made the excuse that she was too tired to give a massag . Mr. Seagal then demanded to see the tattoo on Ms. Nguyen's right appendix. Believing that sho .. ving the tattoo vas the only way she could escape. Ms. Nguyen lifted up her top around her waist just high enough to show the tattoo to Mr. SeagaL As Ms. Nguyen started to show her tattoo, Ir. Seagal forced his head up Ms. Nguyen's top, put his mouth on her bare

PLAINTIFF'S COI\1PLAlNT FO~ DAI'tlAG£S 12

3

breasts; and began sucking her nipples. Ms. Nguyen pulled away fr0111 Mr. Seaga] and ran to her

2 room-

55.

Fearing for her safety Ms. Nguyen began plotting her escape from the house. In the afternoon of Thursda r, February 25. 20 I 0, Ms. 1 guyen again asked to

4

56.

;) speak with Mr. Dang in order to secure transportation back to Los Angele . Mr. Dang reid Ms. 6 Ngu len that he was too busy to talk with her that da .

7

57.

'riday, February 26, 2010 came and went, and Mr. Dang still didn't sp ak with

8 Ms. guyen. In a conver ation that day with Vanessa Johnson) Ms. Johnson told Ms. Nguyen 9 that she had responded in late January or early February to a Craigsiist ad for the Exe .utiv ~

10 Assistant job- had b en hired as Mr. Fischer's replacement in early February, and actually began 11 work in t re l;;Kecutlve Assistant job at least a week before February 19, 20 t 0 when Ms. Nguyen 12 responded to the - 'to" 1St ad for an Executive Assistant. Ms. Johnson also confirmed that after 13 she was alreedy hb.'d ' e Executive Assistant replacement for Iv r, Fischer, sex-on demand

14

end

15 58.

16

17 on deaf ears.

19

20 evening of Sunday, February 28,2010.

21

59.

On Sunday, February 28.2010, Ms. Nguyen spent the entire day planning her

22

escape. When Ms. Nguyen told Mr. Seagal that she was meeting her "family" later that ·night afterwork, he initially responded, "I don 't care if yo II tell them you're working {or me. just rel1

24' them you can't get offfrom work."

25

60.

Ms. Nguyen told Mr. Seagal that she wouldn't leave until late in the evening, hut

26 insisted that because her "family' had come from out of state she had to see them.

27

61.

Mr. Seagal told her to get back to the house by the next morning. After repeated

28 unsuccessful attempts to coax a cab driver to come to the far away house, at approximately 11 ;00

PLALl'lTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMACES

13

2 3

67,

On Wednesday, March 3. 2010, Ms. Johnson left a lengthy voicemail message

4 5

p.m. a cab finally pulled into the driveway, Mr. Scagal followed Ms. Nguyen to the cub, carrying a flashlight with a gun attached to it. Ms. Nguyen ran to the cab, and got inio the front seat next to the driver just ahead of Mr. Seagal. Fearing that Mr. Seagal would tell her to get out of the cab and order the cab driver to leave, Ms. Nguyen told the driver that the man following her was Steven Seagal, and to please get out of there as fast as he could.

62. As Mr. Seagal shined theflashlight in the cab driver's face, the driver waived to

1r. Seagal, said he was a fan, and began to drive off.

E3. As soon as the cab was out of Mr. Seagal's eyesight. Ms. Nguyen broke down

into tears. Ms. Nguyen told the cab driver about Me Seagal's abuse, and repeatedly thanked him for helping her esc e. As Ms, Nguyen told her story, she became so hysterical that be cab driver remained stopped at a red light even after it turned green in order to comfort her. The cab

driver t k Ms. - to dO'V'l"1HOVv11 New Orleans, where she met her friends.

64. was so afraid when she escaped the ho sc that she left behind

everythi .,.. f \. rue t at she wried, including (I) her car keys; (2) aJ l of her clothes: 3) her only

6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14, 15 16 17 18 19

65.

20

66.

Defendants repeatedly told Ms. Nguyen that they would not pay her airfare back

2] to Los Angeles or return her personal property unless she came back to New Orleans and signed 22 a release.

23

24 telling Ms. Nguyen that she would FedEx her car keys and enclose a release agreement in th

25 same envelope. but that Mr. Seagal would nor return her personal possessions until he knew she 26 had signed the release and that it wasin the mail.

27 68. Ms. Nguyen borrowed the money for airfare from a family member and paid her

28 own way back to Los Angeles.

PLAINTIFF'S CO:MPLAIOL.NMT=-iFr., O"\iRn-r;D;-'A~M:;;-A-;-G;;=;-~Ec;S---------

14

IfONONt LAW GROll"

1

70,

Prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Ms. Nguyen filed complaints with the

69.

In retaliation for Ms. Nguyen's complaints about Defendants' illegal conduct and

2 her refusal to sign a release absol ving Defendants from liability Defendants have continued to

3 retaliate against her. Among other retaliatory conduct, Defendants have still refused to return all 4 of Ms. Nguyen's personal property in their possession, custody, and controL

5

IV.

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

6 7 8

9 California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (UDFEH '), and fully complied with all

10 of (he requirements set forth in California Government Code section 12960. The DFEH issued 11 "right to sue' letters in connection with the complaints, copies of which are attached hereto and

12 All conditions precedent to the institution of all claims and/or caus es of

15 16

17

18

19 (CaHfo'!-!r'nI_!l' !!!ia'!...:!l ..... ~Y!!.~~~¥!.l~~~lIQiI!-J~_tIJ!..!1!!1f1..:~~~~~:2.H!~~~

20 (Against Defendants Seagal (in both his individual and employer capacities), Steamroller

21 Productions, Mojo Priest, and Does 1 through 50; inclusive)

22

Plaintiff Nguyen realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 70,

71.

inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

24,

Defendants SeagaJ (in his employer capacity), Steamroller Productions, Mojo

72.

25 Priest, Inc., and DOES I-50j are each subject to the laws of the State Of California and are

26 entities subject to suit under FEHA fOf sexual harassment in that each of these Def ndants is an 27 employer who regularly employs one (1) or more persons.

28 /1/

PLAfNTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

15

PO. 'ONI L.\ W CROUP

4

73. Defendant Seagal i also subject to personal liabllity under FEHA for sexual

2 harassment because he was an employee and/or officer, director; managing agent. or owner of an 3 employer who regularly employs one (L) or more persons.

74.

FERA.. prohibits unlawful harassment of females. FEHA specifically proscribe

5 the following conduct.

6 (a) creating a work environment that is hostile or abusive on th basis of sex;

7 (b) expressly or impliedly conditioning employment benefits on submission to or

R. tolerance of unwel orne sexual advance;

9 (c) assault, impeding or blocking physical movement, or any ph sical

10 interference with the normal work or movement of females;

11. (d) conditioning an empl yrnent benefit upon an exchange of sexual favors;

12 al, physical, or visual haras rnent because of sex;

_~_~o p 'event harassment or to preted the vi urns from harassment after

13 (f)
lcJ an. m
]5
16 sufficiently a
17 recurrence of
18 75
19 their own con
20 (a)
21
22 ' 23 24 25 26

(b)

27

(c)

28

eo

Mr. Seagals statement to Ms. Nguyen shortly before the plane took off

from Los Angeles that his wife "wouldn't care if you were my lover" and "wouldn't mind if you and 1 had a sexual relationship:'

Impliedly conditioning employment benefits of the Executive Assistant job through representations made in California upon Ms. Nguyeu' S submission to and/or tolerance of Mr. Seagal' s un we lcome sexual advances.

Requiring Ms. Nguyen to watch as "Sasha' and Me Seagal performed sex acts on each other.

PLAft"fTIfF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

16

BOSOl'iII.AW GROUp

9 10 11

13

1

78.

10 committing the foregoing acts, Defendant Seagal in his individual Defendant

(d) (e)

3

4

5

6 7

(g)

Repeated physical sexual assaults on Ms. Nguyen by Mr. Seagal,

Mr. Seagal's impeding afMs. Nguyen's physical movement during and after his physical sexual assaults of her.

Conditioning Ms. Nguyen's continued employment upon th requirement that she live in the same house as Mr. Seagal and be available to provide "sex on call' to him 24 hours a day> '7 days a week.

Failing to prevent the harassment complained of as herein above alleged, or to protect Ms. Nguyen from harassing conduct after she complained about that cOndUG1; and

Failing to investigate Ms. guyen's complaints of harassment prornptl. , effectively and sufficiently, and failing to take appropriate prompt, medial action in order to prevent the recurrence of the harassment, or to

'." " I lne the individuals who were known t b{! harassers,

14 7 uyen as subjected to apattern ofs xual harassment by Defendents. nil

15 each of them. he pattern anc course

(h)

16

J 7 unlawful empl

J 8 77.

19 Nguyen has su 'W1 es'~ rf os wages, lost bonuses,

20 lost benefits, and other pecuniary loss according to proof. Ms. Nguyen has also suffered and ill 2l continue to suffer physical and emotional injuries, including nervousness, h\lmiliation,

22 depression, anguish, embarrassment, fright shock, pain, discomfort and anxiety, The amount of 23 Ms. Nguyen's damages will be ascertained at trial, and are in excess of $1 ,OOO/JOO.

24

25 apacity, and/or Defendant Seagal in his capacity as an rnployer, and/or Def ndant Steamr II r 26 Productions, and/or Defendant Mojo Priest) and/or DOES 1·50, have been guilty .01' oppression, 27 fraud, or malice under California Civil Code Section 3294, thereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to

2'8

PLAINTlFF'S COMPLAlNT FOR DAM.~GES

17

nONONI L,\\\I GRQUP

3

__ .. efendant in accordance with California aIvi/ Code § 3294 in a sum

punitive damages in a sum appropriate to punish and make an example our of each of the 2 foregoing Defendants.

79.

The acts of oppression, fraud, or malice, were engaged in by employees of

4 Defendant Seagal in his employer capacity, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions, and/or

5 Defendant Mojo Priest, and/or DOES i-SO. Each of the foregoing Defendant employers had

6 advance knowledge of the unfitness of each employee who acted with malice, oppression, or

7 fraud and employed him or her with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of Ms. Nguyen, 8 and/or authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct for which an award of punitive damages is

9 sought, and/or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice. The advance knowledge

10 and onscious disregard, authorization, ratification, or act of oppression, fraud, or malice was 11 committed by rn: on the part of an officer. director, Dr managing agent of each of the corporate

12 mployer Defcud] ereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to punitive and exemplary damages agains;

I 3 each ccrporat 1 4 appropria ~ 0

]5 80,

16

17 12965(b)_

18 [9

20 ILLEGAL TR4.FFICKING OF FEMALES FOR SEX

'21 (Against Defendant Seagal individually, Defendant Seagal in his Capacity A: An Er:nplo_ref",

22 Defendant Steamroller Productions, Defendant Mojo Priest, and Does 1 through 50,

23 inclusive)

24 8 J. Ms. Nguyen realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs I through 80,

2_- I inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

26 82. California Penal Code § 236.} provides that

27

28

PLAINTlFF""S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 18

BONOi'li LAW GROUP

2
3
4
5 S"
,).
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 84.
14 claim un
15
16 "Any person who deprives or violates the persona! liberty of another with the intent. . , to obtain forced labor or services is guilty of human trafflcking .; "

California Civil Code Section 52.5(a) provides that:

"(a) A victim of human trafficking, as defined in Section 236.1 of the Penal Code, may bring a civil action for actual

damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages,

injunctive relief, any combination of those, or any other • ppropriate relief. A prevailing plaintiff may also be awarded attorneys) fees and costs."

___ ... 'tvl! Code Section 52.S(b) provides that prevailing plaintiff in a

17

18 85.

20 and/or Defendant Mojo Priest, Inc., and/or DOES 1-50 individually and/or c llecti ely

21 "Defendants" , engaged in conduct prohibited by Penal Code Section 236.1 within the State of 22 California which deprived or violated Ms. Nguyen's personal liberty v .. ith the intent to obtain

23 forced labor or services.

24

86,

The unlawful deprivation or violation of Ms. Nguyen's per. onal liberty included

25 the substantial and su .tained restriction of her liberty which was accomplished through fraud)

26 deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to Ms. Nguyen. under

27 circumstances where Ms. guyen received or apprehended the threat and reasonably believed

28

I'LAINTlFF'S COI'ffPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

19

BONONI LA W CROUI>

3

IWNO:-<) LAW GROUP

1 that it was likely that Mr. Seagal would carry it out. within the meaning of California Penal

2 Code Section 236.I(d).

S7.

Ms. Nguyen's forced labor or services that were performed provided, or obtained

4 through force. fraud, coercion, or equivalent conduct was the result of conduct by Mr. Seagal

5 that would reasonably overbear the will of both M .. Ngu; en or any reasonable person. as. 6 provided in California Penal Code Section 236.1(e).

7

88.

The conduct of Mr. Seagal and/or the other Defendants. and each of them.

8 constituted severe forms ftrafficking in persons as defined by 22 U.S.C. § 7102(8')

9

89.

The conduct of Defendant Seagal individually, and/or a an mployee of

10 Defendant Seagalas an employer, and/or the conduct of Defendant Seagal as an empl .yee of 11 Defendant Steamroller Productions, and/or the conduct of Defendant Seagal as an employee of 12 Defendant MOJo)' , Inc., and/or the conduct of DOES 1-50, made Ms. Nguyen a victim of

13 human traffic}bng as ell in Section 236. t of the California Pe1p] Code, thereby authorizing

14 Ms. Ngu 15 16 17

18 90.

19 Nguyen has su .

20 lost benefits, and other pecuniary loss according to proof. Ms. Nguyen has also suffered and will 21 continue to suffer physical and emotional injuries, including nervousnes . h rniliation,

22 depression, anguish, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort and anxiety. The amount of 23 Ms. Nguyen's damages will be ascertained at. trial, and are in excess 0[$1.000,000.

24

91.

In committing the foregoing acts, Defendant Seagal in his individual Defendant

~5 capacity, and/or Defendant Seagal in his capacity as an employer, and/or Defendant 'teamroller 26 Productions, and/or Defendant Mojo Priest, and/or DOES 1-50, have been guilty of oppression, 27 fraud, or malice under California Civil Code Section 3294, thereby entitling Ms. guyen to

28

PLA INTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DA1\fAG ES

20

punitive damages in a sum appropriate to punish and make an example out of each of the 2 foregoing Defendants-

3 92. The acts of oppression: fraud, or malice, were engaged in by employees of

4 Defendant Seagal in his employer capacity, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions, and/or 5 Defendant Mojo Priest, and/or DOES 1-50, Each of the foregoing Defendant employers had 6 ,advance knowledge of the unfitness of each employee who acted with malice, oppression, or

7 fraud and employed him or bel' with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of Ms. Nguyen. g and/or authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct for which an award of punitive damages is

9 sought.and/or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, The advance knowledge

10 and conseious disregard authorizati n, ratiflcaiion, or act of oppression, fraud, or malice was

11 committed by OI' on the part of an officer, director or managing agent of each of the corporate 12 employer Defenc _ , rereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to punitive and exemplary damages against

__ efendant in accordance with California ivil Code § 3294 in a sum

13 14 appropn

15 93,

16 ovid d in CaJi fornia 'fll Code S 52.5 ~).

17

18 19

20 FAlLURE TO PREVENT HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF THE CALlFORl'l'IA

21 FAIR EMPLOYMENT AN.D HOUSING ACT

_2 ( Against Defendant Seagal in his Capacity as an Employer, Defendant Steamrnller

23 Productions, Defendant Mojo Priest, !'nc.,and Does 1 through 50)

24

Ms. Nguyen realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained

94.

25 in paragraphs 1 through 93 above) inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth 26 he rei 11.

27

95.

California Government Code Se tion I2940(k) makes it an unlawful

28 employmeJ1t practice for an emplQyer to "fail to take all reasonahle steps to prevent PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAiNT FOR DAMAGES

21

BONONI LAW CROIlJ>

16 17 18 19 20

22

23

26

11

OONONII,i\W mwu-p

discrimination and harassment from occurring." Defendant Seagal in his capacity as an

2 employer, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions, and/or Defendant Mojo Priest. Inc. 3 and/or Does I through 50, violated this provision by, among other' things, allowing Mr.

4 Seagal to sexually hara s Ms. Nguyen, failing to investigate Ms. lgu -en's complaints of

5 sexual harassment and sexual assault by Mr. Seagal failing to adequately discipline and top 6 Mr. Seagal from continuing to sexually harass and sexually assault Ms. Nguyen tailing to

7 have in place effective policies prohibiting sexual harassment, failing to enforce anti-sexual

8 harassment policies, allowing Mr. Seaga.l to treat Ms. Nguyen in a demeaning,

9 dehumanizing fashion, permitting Mr. Seagal to continue to sexually harass and sexually 10 assault Ms. Nguyen. and by the other conduct alleged above,

96.

As a result of the foregoing conduct by Defendant Seagal, and/or Defendant

12 Steamrolt r Plod.~ ..... u' s, and/or Defendant Mojo Priest, Inc., and/or Defendant Does 1

14 9

15 Nguyen has s

98.

In committing the foregoing acts, Defendant Seagal in his individual Defendant

21

capacity, and/or Defendant Seagal in his capacity as an employer, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions. and/or Defendant Mojo Priest, and/or DOES 1·50 have been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice under California Civil Code Section 3294, thereby entitling Ms. iguyen rc punitive damages in a sum appropriate to punish and make an example out 0 r each of the foregoing Defendants.

24

99.

The acts of oppression, fraud, or malice, were engaged in by employees of

27 Defendant Seagal in his employer capacity, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions, and/or _8 Defendant Mojo Priest, and/or DOES 1-50. Each of the foregoing Defendant employers had

PLAINT!FF'S COJ\fIPLAINT FOR DAMAGE~_"--------

22

10

100. A", rc ult of Defendants' acts as alleged herein, Ms. Nguyen is entitled to

advance knowledge of the unfitness of each employee who acted "vith malice, op ression.or

2 fraud and employed him or her with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of Ms. l' guven, 3 and/or authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct for which an award of punitive damages is

4 sought, and/or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, The advance knowledge

5 and con e101.iS disregard, authorization, ratification. or act of oppression, fraud. or malice was

6 committed by or on the part of an officer, director, or managing agent of each of the corporate

7 employer Defendants, thereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to punitive and exemplary damages against 8 each corporate employer Defendant in ac iordance with California Civil Code § 3294 in a sum

9 appropriate to punish and make an example of each corporate employer Defendant,

) 1 reasonable a t rneys' fees and costs of suit as provided in California Government Code §

12 12965(b.

13

i4 15 l6

17 (Agains

18

19 10L

20 inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

21

102. California Government Code Section 12940(h) prohibits retaliati on against

22 employees for opposing illegal sexual harassment and discrimination. because employees refuse 23' to consent to illegal sexual harassment or discrimination, because employees have complained 24 about illegal sexual harassment or discrimination, or because an employee has refused to waive 25 her rights to legal remedies to!' illegal acts of sexual harassment or discrimination.

26

lO3. The regulations implementing the anti-retaliation provisions ofFEHA make it

27 unlawful for an employer "to demote, suspend, reduce, fail to hire or consider for hire, fail to

18 gi\1e equal consideration in making employment decisjons~ fail to treat impartially in the context PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAlNT FOR DAMAGES

23

JJONONI LM\' CRO~IJ'

of any recommendations for subsequent employment which the employer or other covered entity 2 may make, adversely affect working conditions, or otherwise deny any employm nr benefit to an 3 individual ... " in retaliation for- any of the protected conduct as set forth in the preceding

4 para graph.

5

t 04. As set forth in detail above, Ms. Nguyen complained about illegal sexual

6 harassment and Mr. Seagals repeated sexual assaults, demanded that Mr. Seagal's rllegal

7 conduct cease, refused Mr. Seagal's repeated demands for sex, opposed his physical sexual 8 'attacks before, during, and after their occurrence and refused Defendants' demands that she 9 wai ve her legal rights under FEHA

10 105. Both .1"\. Seagal and Mr. Dang were supervis IS and had the authority. in the

11 interest of Defendam Seagal in his capacity as an employer, and/or Defendant Steamroller

12 Producnons, and.

endant Mojo Priest, Inc., and/or Defendant Does 1 through 50, to hire.

13 > discharge, reward, and/or discipline ot~er employees, or to

] 4 res ponsi .. dir .. et th am, or t recommend certain actions with the use of independent ·l,ldgmcnt. '15 The foregoing 16 Mr. Dang wer

17 106.

18

19 cted rights to be free

20 from harassment, and/or after she refused to waive her rights to the legal remedies provided by

2 J FEHA. After Ms. Nguyen engaged in the foregoing protected activities, the retaliatory actions 22 of the employer Defendants, and each of them, included:

23

(a)

Increasing the severity of ML Seagal=s sexual assaults upon Ms. Nguyen in response to each ofber complaints;

Refusing to penni! Ms. Nguyen to return to Los A .. ngeles when she pleaded to do so because they were afraid that she would exercise her

24

(b)

26

27 18

legal rights;

PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

24

BONOl'/J l...-\\Y GROUP

2 3 4 5 6

(e)

(t:)

After Ms. Nguyen returned to and wa living in California, r fusing t return her personal belongings in their possession unless she signed a relea e of her legal rights under FEHA;

After Plaintiff returned to and was livir g in California, continuing to confiscate her laptop computer and refusing to return it;

Refusing to pay Plaintiff her full wages earned in California as requited

(d)

7 under California wage/hour law.

8

9 107. The adverse employment actions as described above were done in retaliation for

10 Pla.intit'f.s activity protected by FE:HA.

11 IDS. As a proximate result of the conduct of Defendants, and each a them, Ms.

12 d will to continue to suffer damages in terms ant st wages, lost bonuses.

13 lost benefits, and otn __ ~u~mary loss according to proof. Ms. Ng yen has also suffered and will 14 continue ]5

16

17 109.

18 19 20 fraud, or malice under California Civil Code Section 3294. thereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to

_1 punitive damages in a sum appropriate to punish and make an example out of each 0 the

22 foregoing Defendants.

23 110. The acts of oppression, fraud, or malice, were engaged in by employees of

24 Defendant Seagal in his employer capacity, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions: and/or 25 Defendant Mojo Priest, and/or DOES 1-50. Each of the foregoing Defendant employers had 26 advance knowledge of the unfitness of each employee who acted with malice, oppression, or

27 fraud and employed him or her with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of Ms. lguven, 28 and/or authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct for which an award of punitive damages is

PLA1NTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

25

BONONI tAW CROlJP

18 19 20

22

'Y' _;)

24

25 26

27

28

15 16

1 sought, and/or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, The advance knowledge 2 and conscious disregard; authorization, ratification, Of act of oppression, fraud.or malice was

3 committed by or on the part of an officer, director, or managing agent of each of the corporate

4 employer Defendants, thereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to punitive and exemplary damages against 5 each corporate employer Defendant in accordance with California Civil Code § 3294 in a SLUn

6 appropriate to punish and make an example of each corporate employ "r Defendant.

7 111. As result of Defendants' acts as alleged herein, Ms. Nguyen is entitled to

8 reasonable attorneys' fees and co ts of suit as provided in California Government Code §

9 12965(b). 10 11 12 13 14

IX.

,FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

ERMINATION IN VIOLATION 0 PUBLIC POLICY

1]2.

17 inclusive, of

113.

21

with Defendant Mojo Priest, Inc., and/or with Defendant Does 1 through 50 because. she refused to participate in, protested, opposed, and refused to waive rights afforded by (1) antidiscrimination, anti-retaliation, and anti-harassment laws; and (2) Jaws forbidding the transportation and trafficking of females for sex, in VIolation of public policy embodied in the statutes and constitutions of the State of California, and/or ofthe United States, These public policies are set forth, among other places, in Article I, Section 8 of the California Constitution, the California Fair Employment And Housing Act, California Government Code Sections 12900

et. seq., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U. S. C. Sections 2000e et. seq., the Mann Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2421 et. seq., and California Civil Code Section. 52.5.

PLA lNTrFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

26

114. As a proximate result of the conduct of Defendants, and each of them, Ms.

2. Nguyen has suffered and will to continue to suffer damages in terms of lost wages" lost bonuses, 3 lost benefits, and other pecuniary loss according to proof. Ms. Nguyen has also suffered and will 4 continue to suffer physical and emotional injuries, including nervousness. humiliation,

5 depression, anguish, embarrassment, fright, shock. pain, discomfort and anxiety. The amount of 6 Ms. Nguyen's actual damageswill be ascertained at trial, and are in excess of $1.,000,000.

7 115. In committing the foregoing acts, Defendant Seagal in his capacity as an

8 employer. and/or Defendant Steamroller Produ lions, and/or Defendant Mojo Priest. and/or 9 DOES 1 ~50> ha e been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice under California Civil Code

10 Section "'294, thereby entitling Ms. Nguyen to punitive damages in a sum appropriate to punish 11 and make an e 'ample out of each of the foregoing Defendants.

12 116. s of oppression, fraud. or malice, were engaged in by employees of

11 Defendant Seagalin ployer capacity, and/or Defendant Stea roller Productions, and/or

14 D fendafatJ,t1o' o Pri t, and. T DOES 1-50. Each of the foregoing Defendant e-mpln ers had

15 'on, n

16 disr ard of the nghts . safety of Ms, Ngu en.

17 18 19

20 committed by or on the part of an officer, director, or managing agent of each of the corporate 21 employer Defendants, thereby entitling 111s. Nguyen to punitive and exemplary damages against 22 each corporate employer Defendant in ac ordance with California Civil Code § 3294 in a sum 23 appropriate to punish and make an example of each corporate employer Defendant.

24 / i /

25 III

26 11/

27 1/1

28 II;.

PLAINTIfF'S COMPLAINT FOR D,\MAGES 27

IIU1'IOI"II,AW CROUI'

10 11

12

13

14

15

16 17 18 19

20

21

2

120. Defendant Seagal in his individual capacity, andlor Defendant Seagal in his

3

X.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FALSE REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT EM,PLOYMENT

4

(Violation of California Labor Code Sections 970 and 972)

5 ' (Against Defendants Seagal Personally, Seagal in his Capacity as an Employer, Steamroller

6

Productions, Mojo Priest, Inc., and Doe-s 1 through 50)

7 117" Ms. Nguyen realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 116.

8 inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

9 118. California Labor Code Section 970 provides that:

"No person. OJ' agent or officer thereof, directly or

indirectly, shall influence, persuade, or engage any

erson to change ... from any place within this ~""'Ii: to any place outside, for the purpose 0

therefor, .. ,,"

22 119. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 972, "any person, or agent or officer

23 thereof, who violates any provision of Section 970 is liable to the parry aggrieved, in a civil

24 action, for do-uble damages resulting from such misrepresentations, .. ."

')_)

26 capacity as an employer, and/or Defendant Steamroller Productions: and/or D fendant Mojo 27 Priest, Inc., and/or Defendant Does 1 through 50, "through or by means of knowingly false 28 representations . . .", which were "spoken, written, or advertised in printed form ., ." 10

PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAJNT FOR DAMAGES

28

HOr;ONl L;\W 6ROI!l"

L

Ms. Nguyen in California, relied upon by Ms. Nguyen in California, and which damaged Ms. 2 Nguyen in California and elsewhere, influenced, persuaded) and/or engaged Ms. Nguyen to

3 change from California to Louisiana for the purpose of working in the job of Executi ve

4 Assistant.

5 121, Defendants, and each of them, influenced, persuaded, or engaged Ms. N15,ll. en to 6 change from California to Louisiana through or by knowingly false representations made, relied 7 upon, and causing damage in, California concerning the job duties she would perform, the length

8 of time such work would last, and/or the compensation therefor.

9 122. At the time Defendants and each of them, made misrepresentations to Ms.

10 Nguyen. Ms. Nguyen did not know the falsity of the representations and relied upon the

11 representations to her detriment.

13

n.r..~m. their conduct as specifically in paragraphs 12 - 69 above, Defendant . __ 'J" employees, agents, and officers, violat d the provisions of California

123.

14 15

l6 124.

]7

18

20 depression; anguish, embarrassment, fright, shock, pain, discomfort and anxiety. The amount of 21 Ms. Nguyen's damages will be ascertained at trial, and are in excess of$1.000,000.

22 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.

23 PRAYER

24

For general damages, according to proof, on each cause of action for

1.

25

which such damages are available:

.~ -

26

For special damages, according to proof, ali each cause of action for

2.

27 which such damages are available;

28 .iJ/

PLAINTIFF COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

29

BONO I LAW CI\OUP

3

tJdL- A £JJ.)t-

William S. W4ldo Attornev for Plaintiff

Ka_ de ~ n

I

I 3. For punitive damages, according to proof for each cause of action for

2 ! which such damages are available;

4.

For double damages for the Sixth Cause of Action for Violation of

4 Califomia Labor Code Section 970 and 972;

5.

For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest according to law;

For reasonable attorneys' Iees incurred in this action on those causes of

5 6

6.

7 action for which SLlCh fees are recoverable under the applicable law;

7,

For costs of suit incurred in this action; and

8 9 10

8

For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

BONO 11 LAW GROUP, LLP

11 Dated: April 12,2010

12

13 By:

14

15

16 17 18 19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PLAINTfFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 30

BONOr'o'l LAW CROZIP

7

8 By:

9

10 11

12

13 14 15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 24

25

26

27

28

2

J,ft~J14--

William S. Waldo Attorneys for Plaintiff Kayden Nguyen

5

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

3 Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all causes of action alleged herein in the

4 Complaint For Damages.

6 Dated: April 12.2010

BONONI LA W GROUP LLP

PLAINTfFF~S COMPLAlNT FOR DAMAGES

31

1 2

merica that the foregoing is true aru correct.

VERIFICATION

3 T have read the foregoing COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGESj DEMAND FOR .JURY

4 TRIAL and know its contents.

5

6 I am a patty to this action. The matters stated ill the COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES;

7 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL are true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters

8 which are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true,

9

10 Exec-uted this J.L day of Apri 1 2010 at Los Angeles, California,

11

12

n er penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and under the

13

14 15 16

]7

18 19 20

21 22

24

25 26

27

28