STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF SAGINAW GABRIEL VILLARREAL, o49ots Plaintiff, Case No. 20. -CD-a fe Hon ANVEL TRICE Ill P63072 THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SAGINAW, TIM MUETER, and SCOTT GELDING, Jointly and Severally, Defendants. JONATHAN R. MARKO (?72450) Marko Law, PLLC Attorney for Plaintiff 1300 Broadway Street By Fifth Floor ae Detroit, MI 48226 (313) 777-7529 / F: (313) 771-5785 jon@jmarkowlaw.com A civil action against the above-named Defendants arising out of the same or substantially similar transactions or occurrences has previously been filed in this Court. The case aumber is 19-039344-NO-3 and the assigned judge is the Honorable Janet M. Boes. PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND NOW COMES Plaintiff, Gabriel Villareal, by and through his attorneys, Marko Law, PLLC, and for their Complaint against Defendants, state as follows: PARTIES AND JURISDICTION1. Plaintif Gabriel Villareal is the father of John Doo, and at all times relevant, isan employee of the Defendants, working as 2 maintenance man, and residing in Saginaw County, Michigan, 2. Atalll times relevant, Defendant Catholic Diocese of Saginaw (“Saginaw Diocese”) was and is an unincorporated association, with its principal place of business located at 5800 Weiss Street in Saginaw, Michigan, ‘The Saginaw Diocese was established by papal decree in Jn of 1938, and fiantions a a faith community encompassing elven counties in easter Michigan: Arenac, Bay, Clare, Gladwin, Gratiot, Huron, Isabella, Midland, Saginaw, Sanilac, and Tuscola. 3. "Defendant Tim Mueter was the supervisor of Plaintiff Gabriel Villarreal and an employee of Defendant Diocese. 4, Defendant Scott Gelding was and is the supervisor of Plaintiff Gabriel Villareal and an employee of Defendant Diocese. 5. The amount in controversy exceeds the Court’s jurisdictional limit, exclusive of interest, cost, and attorney fees. 6. Venue and jurisdiction are properly vested in this Cou, UAL ALLE IONS 7, Plaintiff hereby restates and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs one (1) through eight (8) as though fully sot forth herein, 8. Father Deland was ordained as a priest on June 17, 1963, and had served as pastor of the St. Agnes Catholic Church in Freeland, Michigan since July 2011.9. Deland regularly worked out of the St Agnes Church and the Catholic Diocese of Saginaw. 10, John Doe was a 17-year-old minor student at Freeland High Schoo! in the fall of 2016 and spring of 2017. 11, Deland was also a regular volunteer staff member of Freeland High School, where he regularly greeted and interacted with students, 12. Deland introduced himself to and interacted with John Doe on a couple of occasions during school, during which Deland made John Doe feel very uncomfortable. 13. On May 14, 2017, a classmate of John Doe suddenly and tragically passed away. 14. On May 18, 2017, Defendants hosted an event at St. Agnes Church Freeland, to which all Freeland High School students and their families, including John Doe were invited!, for purpose of allowing grieving students to speak with counselors, The funeral services were to immediately follow the event. The event and the services were hhosted and presided over by Deland, 15, John Doe attended the event at St, Agnes Church, and arrived at same close to 2:00 pm on May 18%, 16, Gabriel Villarreal is the father of John Doe and worked at Defendant diocese for approximately 26 years as a maintenance man, "the high soho! and/or schoo! district actually made cals to all sudents and families, advising of the date and tine of the servives which wore arranged for the students at St. Agnes Church, 317. Prior to Deland sexually assaulting his son, Mr. Villarreal was an exemplary employee, having served the defendant diocese faithfully and without any major discipline, 18, Tn fact, in twenty-plus years that Mr. Villarreal worked for the diocese prior to the sexual abuse of his son coming to light, Mr. Villarreal was a model employee. 19. This all changed when Mr, Villarreal reported to the defendant diocese that his son was molested by Deland in or around February of 2018. 20, . As a result of his complaitits of protected civil rights activity, the sexual harassment, and attempted abuse of his son, the Defendants retaliated agninst Mr, Villareal and began to harass him. 21, Defendants began to harass the Mr. Villarreal for reporting the abuse of his son and cooperating with a police investigation, including but not limited to: a, Blaming him and his son for the bishop passing away, telling ‘him that “the bishop would still be alive if it wasn’t for yout son”; b. When the police wore present, telling Mr. Villarroal “the police are here, maybe they want to talk to you because you're the mole”; . Referring to Mr, Villarreal as “the mole”, a term used to describe a “spy”; 4, Picking up the phone and pretending that Defendant Deland—the man who sexually assaulted Mr. Villarreal’s son-~ was on the other line, even though this was impossible as Deland was in prison; e, Continually mock and harass Mr, Villarreal in retaliation for him and his son reporting Deland’s abuse and cooperating with the police, 22. The Defendants also began to take a number of adverse employments actions against Plaintiff Villarreal for his reporting the sexual abuse and cooperating with the police including but not limited to:23, a. Cutting his hours from fulltime to part-time; b. Cutting his medical benefits, ©. Cutting his pension benefits; 4. Cutting his paid-time off; e. Falsely disciplining him in retaliation for the above described actions, £ Taking away Mr. Villarreal’s job responsibilities including taking away his master key and limiting his access to the physical premises for the first time in 26 years. That asa proximate result of the actions and inactions desoribed herein, Plaintiffs have suffered injuries and damages which include, but are not limited to, the following: Reasonable medical expenses; s Physical pain and suffering; . Severe and permanent feelings of fear, anger, and guilt; = Severe and continuing mental anguish and emotional distress; . Fright and shock; f, Embarrassment, humiliation, and/or moztification; Future and past economic damages, including wage Joss and medical ® expenses; h. All damages, including but not limited to exemplary, compensatory, and punitive damages, allowed under Michigan and law; i, Attomey fees and costs, COUNT IViolation of Michigan Eliott Larsen Civil Rights Act (Hostile Work Environment) 24: Plaintiff hereby restates and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs as if fully set forth herein. 25. Atal material times, Plaintiff was covered by and'within the meaning of Michigan Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act, MCL 37.2101, et se 26, Plaiatift was subjected to continuous perverse and unwelcome harassment in retaliation for his complaining about the sexual abuse of his son and for cooperating with a police investigation into the same, 27. ‘The unweleome conduct was based on Plaisitif’s previous complaints, 28. The unwelcome conduct affected a term and condition of Plaintiff's employment and/or had the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with Plaintiff's work performance and/or created intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. 29, Defendant Diovese is liable for the actions and/or inactions of its employees based on the doctrines of respondeat superior and vicarious liability. 30. Defendants’ conduct was a violation of the Michigan Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act, MCL 37-2101, et seq. in that it caused him a hostile work environment in which he suffered and continues t6 suffer damages. COUNT It iolation of Michigan Elliott Larsen (Retaliation) il Rights Act 31, ° Plaintiff hereby restates and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.32. At all material times, Plaintif? was covered by and within the meaning of ‘Michigan Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act, MCL 37.2101, et seg. 33. _ Plaintiff was retaliated against and subjected to adverse employment actions and/or contractual and business dealings, including but not limited to disparate treatment, as a result of asserting his civil tights including but not limited to complaining of sexual harassment and other unlawful employment practices 34, The unwelcome conduct and conduct complained of was in retaliation for protected activity under ELCRA, 35. The unwelcome conduct affected a term or condition of employment of the Plaintiff and/or created a hostile work environment. 36. Asa direct and proximate result Defendants’ unlawful actions Plaintiff has sustained and continues to sustain injury and damages. 2, Plaintiff was retaliated against and subjected to adverse employment actions, including but not'limited disparate treatment, as a resutt of asserting his civil rights including but not limited to complaining of soxual harassment, and cooperating with a police investigation into sexual abuse, and other unlawful employment practices. 63, Defendants actions in retaliating against Plaintiff for asserting his rights under the laws of the State of Michigan and the United Statos are against public policy and should not be tolerated.64. ‘The unwelcome conduct affected a term or condition of employment of the Plaintiff and/or created a hostile work environment. 65. Asa direct and proximate result defendant’s unlawful actions Plaintiff has sustained and continues to sustain injury and damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment against Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000.00, together with interest, costs, attorney fees and exemplary damages so wrongfully incurred. Respectfully symitted, Jonathan R/ Marko (P72450) MARK®LAW, PLLC Fifth Floor Detroit, MI 48226 Phone: 313-777-7529 Fax: 313-777-5785 Email: jon@jmarkolaw.com Dated: March 16, 2020 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that on March (@**2020, | presented the foregoing paper to this Court's via US MAIL and to the above listed Defendants yja certified mail.STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF SAGINAW GABRIEL VILLARREAL, Plaintiff, Case No.20- -CD ve Hon. THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SAGINAW, TIM MUETER, and SCOTT GELDING, Jointly and Severally, Defendants. JURY REQUEST Plaintiff, by and through counsel, hereby requests a trial by jury in the above-captioned matter, Respectfully subpitted, Lk Jonathan R/ Marko (P72450) MARKO/VAW, PLLC 1300 Bradway Street Fifth Floor Detroit, MI 48226 Phone: 313-777-7529 Fax: 313-777-5785 Email: jon@jmarkolaw.com Dated: March 16, 2020 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that on March /(j%2020, I presented the foregoing paper to this Court’s via US MAIL and to the above listed Defenday ja certified mail.