Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04292/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04292-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 02/16

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

GREGORY S. REDMOND, ESQ. (SBN158135)

430 RAILROAD AVENUE

PITTSBURG, CA94565rt,

TELEPHONE: 925.427.9023

FACSIMILE: 925.427.3020

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF GRETA ANDERSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRETA ANDERSON,

PLAINTIFF,

v.

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

DEFENDANT.

} CASE NO: C05-04292S1

) STIPULATION RE: FIRST AMENDED

) COMPLAINT AND ORDER

At the Case Management Conference on June 2, 2006, Plaintiff advised the Court

she intended to amend the pending Complaint and the Court therein set a schedule of

dates. Pursuant to such schedule, the Court ordered Plaintiff to provide American

Airlines' counsel with a copy of the proposed First Amended Complaint by June 30,

2006. American Airlines1 counsel was ordered to advise Plaintiffs counsel whether it

would object to such proposed First Amended Complaint or would stipulate to Plaintiffs

filing of the First Amended Complaint by July 7,2006.

On or about June 30, 2006, Plaintiffs counsel provided American Airlines'

counsel with a copy of the proposed First Amended Complaint, a copy of which is

attached hereto as Exhibit A. Prior to July 7, 2006, America Airlines' counsel notified

Plaintiffs counsel of its willingness to stipulate to the filing of the proposed First

l

STIPULATION RE: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AILRINES, INC,

CASE NO. €05^04292 SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 1 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 1 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 03/16

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

Amended Complaint without waiving and reserving its right to file a Motion to Dismiss

under FRCP 12(b)(6) as well as preserving any and all affirmative defenses relating to the

proposed First Amended Complaint including without limitation any defenses based on

statute of limitations.

Dated: July 12, 2006

Dated: July _, 2006

GREGORY S. REDMOND, ESQ.

Attorney for Plaintiff

GRETA ANDERSON

KENNETH R. O'BRIEN, ESQ.

Attorney for Defendant

AMERICAN AIRLINES

STIPULATION RE: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASENO.C05-04292SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 2 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 2 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 04/16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

IS

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Good cause appearing, the Court grants Plaintiffs request to file the First

Amended Complaint and thereby reserves American Airlines' right to file a FRCP

12(b)(6) motion and assert affirmative defenses relating to the First Amended Complaint.

Date: July ,2006

Judge Susan lllston

STIPULATION RE: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASENO.C05-04292SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 3 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 3 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273028 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 31/16

GREGORY S. REDMOND

C^<te«Hya/-SMB

430 RAILROAD AVE.

PrrrssuRc, CA 94565

TEL: (925) 427-9023

FAX: (925) 427-3020

FACSIMILE TRANSMTTTAL

DATE: My 12, 2006

NO- OF PAGES: 16

FACSIMILE NO:

RE: Anderson v. American Airlines, Inc.

TO: Ken O'Brien, Esq.

FAX:

TELEPHONE:

FROM: Gregory S. Redmond, Esq.

MESSAGE: Stip Re: First Amended Complaint

*********#**********#**********************************•***•********************

CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT

The information on these documents is meant solely for the use of the designated

recipient above. This information is a privileged communication from attorneys or their

agents. If you are not the designated recipient or an agent of the designated recipient

responsible for delivery of this document, you have received these documents in error. As

such, any copying, reviewing, dissemination or distribution of these documents is strictly

prohibited. If you have received these documents in error please contact our office

immediately at (510)-427-9023 and return the documents by mail.

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 4 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 4 of 16
07/12/2086 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 05/16

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

IS

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

GREGORY S. REDMOND, ESQ. (SBN158135)

, 430 Railroad Avenue

Pittsburg.CA 94565

Telephone: 925.427.9023

T^ * * I /%j*H f A P\*^ *} f\f^ Facsimile: 925.427.3020

Attorney for Plaintiff

Greta Anderson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRETA ANDERSON,

PLAINTIFF.

v.

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

DEFENDANT.

) CASENO: cOS-04292 si

) FIRST AMEMDED COMPLAINT FOR

> EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION,

) HARASSMENT, RETALIATION,

) WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN

) VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY,

) INTERFERENCE WITH EXERCISE

) OF CIVIL RIGHTS

)

3

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AILRINES. FNC.

CASE NO. C05-04292 Si

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 5 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 5 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26

|i!

9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 06/16

1

2

3

4

5

6

1

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1. This case seeks relief for employment discrimination under the California

Fair Employment ,& Housing Act <lsFEHA")r common law wrongful termination in

violation of public policy and interference with exercise of civil rights pursuant to

California Civil Code Section 52.1, The Court has jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1332

ojn grounds that there is complete diversity between the parties and the amount in

i

[ controversy is greater than $75,000.

I 2. Venue is proper in that Defendant. American Airlines, maintains offices in

San Francisco, California and does business in this judicial district,. The alleged

discriminatory employment practices took place in San Francisco, California, within this

Judicial district.

3. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendant,

American Airlines ("AA"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the

i

Sitate of Texas, with its corporate headquarters located in Houston, Texas.

i

I 4. At all times relevant herein, AA has maintained a corporate office in San

FJrancisco. California. At all times relevant herein. Plaintiff, Greta Anderson,

('Anderson" % is and was a resident of the State of Nevada and was employed by AA's

San Francisco, California, Base Operations Office.

5. At ail times relevant herein. Anderson was employed by AA as a flight

Attendant based out of AA's San Francisco Base Operations Office. In August 2003,

Anderson had worked for AA for approximately 30 years.

i 6. On or about August 20,2003. Anderson was involved in an incident with a

p|assenger on AAL Flight 1860 from Dallas, TX to Ft. Myers, FL wherein a passenger

dommitted a physical assault and battery against Anderson as a result of Anderson's

attempts to diffuse a situation between two passengers during the flight. The next day,

airline pilot, Hoffman, accused Anderson of conflict with the irate female passenger,

whereas Anderson had followed company taught procedure within her safety duties to

minimize the in-flight passenger disturbance.

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASK NO. C05-04292 SJ

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 6 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 6 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 07/16

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

7. On August 21,2003, approximately thirty minutes prior to AAL Flight 659's

departure, airline pilot, Hoffman yelled at Anderson and pursued her, driving her

backwards, down the aisle of the plane with a raised a fist due to Hoffman's erroneous

belief Anderson had made a complaint to A A against a gate agent named Jose Lepe. In

i fact, Anderson did not report Lepe as accused by Hoffman—another flight attendant,

1 Melissa Dimino, had made the complaint against Lepe.

B Immediately after the AAL Flight 659 landed in Dallas/Ft. Worth. Anderson

I was removed from her flight by A A DFW Flight Service Managers and escorted by A A

j personnel to an office wherein Anderson was required to provide a written statement

detailing the incidents regarding Flight Sequence 25666 ("Ae Sequence").

9. During this meeting, Anderson was instructed by AA personnel to provide a

written statement regarding her (Anderson's) alleged "negative" behavior on the

Sequence 25666. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that AA had

already made an immediate determination Anderson was guilty of committing acts of

"negative" behavior on the Sequence before even conducting an impartial investigation

into the incidents. As requested, Anderson provided a detailed account of the incidents

with diagrams. Anderson also supplied AA several written witness statements from

passengers who were percipient witnesses corroborating Anderson's version of the

incidents on the Sequence,

10. Four flight crew members were also asked to provide written statements

regarding Sequence 25666: airline pilot Randy Hoffman; First Officer, Jill McCollough;

Flight Attendant, Susan Lacasse; Flight Attendant, Melissa Dimino (collectively referred

to as "flight crew"). Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that the

flight crew coordinated their written statements and made false reports to AAL regarding

the alleged incidents pertaining to Anderson of the Sequence. In a letter to Sgt. Glick of

the Ft. Myers Police, Hoffman stated he invoked "Captain's Authority" and had

Anderson removed from the plane for a personal motive in that he claimed Anderson had

allegedly threatened legal action against him.

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC,

CASE NO. C05-04292 SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 7 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 7 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM

4

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PAGE 08/16

i

11. Following the August 21,2003 incidents, Anderson filed a police report

with the Ft. Myers Police Department against Hoflfcnan. Additionally. Anderson filed

several other internal reports ("internal reports") with AA regarding the incident in

j accordance with AA's procedure and protocol including allegations that Hoffman

physically assaulted Anderson, Anderson is informed and believes and thereupon alleges

that no other flight crew member made any internal reports with AA in contbrmance with

[ AA's procedure and protocol.

12. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that, as of August.

25.2003, AA had made a decision to force Anderson into psychiatric counseling due to

the contents of her internal reports. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon

alleges that no other flight crew member was forced into or threatened to submit to

psychiatric counseling as a condition of continued employment as a result of any

incidents relating to the Sequence.

13. On September 4.2003. Anderson met with AA management at the San

Francisco Base Office for a so-called "tact-finding" meeting relating to the Sequence. At

the conclusion of this "fact-finding" meeting, AA's San Francisco Base Manager,

Michael Lambert, informed Anderson that she was being taken off the line because she

was "psychiatrically unsound" and ordered her into psychiatric counseling. Anderson is

informed and believes and thereupon alleges that AA regarded her as being disabled

based on a mental disability without legitimate job justification in that Anderson was

being forced into psychiatric counseling for merely drafting internal reports required by

AA's procedure and protocol.

14. During the course of Anderson's employment with AA, on at least four

separate occasions prior to September 4,2003. AA took Anderson off the line and forced

her to undergo psychiatric/psychological evaluation under threat of termination. On each

of the four prior occasions. Anderson underwent psychiatric/psychological evaluation as

ordered by AA without diagnosis of mental disability. Anderson is informed and believes

and thereupon alleges that AA had no legitimate business justification to order Anderson

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES. INC.

CASE NO. COS-04292 SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 8 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 8 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM

t

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2(5

27

28

PAGE 09/16

i

into psychiatric/psychological evaluation on any of the four prior occasions.

15. On or about October 15,2003, AA "officially" suspended Anderson without

pay. locked her out from the information network and stripped her of her employee

number. Nonetheless. AA continued to order her into psychiatric/psychological

counseling.

16. On or about March 9 and 10, 2004, Anderson under threat of termination,

underwent psychiatric evaluation with Dr. Robert S. Brown ("Dr. Brown") in

Charlottesville, Virginia.

17. On or about April 6,2004, Anderson learned Dr. Brown had disabled her

from her position. As a result of Dr. Brown's report AA ordered Anderson into board

certified psychiatric counseling along with a treatment plan.

18. Anderson is unable to refute Dr, Brown's report in that she has been unable

to obtain the contents and determinations of said report After April 6,2004, Anderson

made several requests of Dr. Brown to obtain his report, the tests conducted and the

findings therein. Dr. Brown has and continues to refuse to directly provide Anderson his

I

I report.

19. On May 12,2004 . AA directed Anderson to cease contacting Dr. Brown

and threatened to terminate her employment if she continued to contact Dr. Brown.

Anderson is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that she has a legal right under

Virginia, Nevada, California and federal law to contact Dr. brown for purposes of

obtaining a copy of her medical records.

20. On March 4,2005. AA again directed Anderson to cease contacting Dr.

Brown under threat of termination.

21. On March 18,2005, AA again directed Anderson to cease contacting Dr.

Brown under threat of termination.

}

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASENO.C05-04292ST

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 9 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 9 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26

l i

9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 10/16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

g

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

IS

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

22. On Match 28, 2005. AA again directed Anderson to cease contacting Dr.

Brown under threat of termination.

23. On August 30.2005, AA again directed Anderson to cease contacting Dr.

Brown under threat of termination.

24. On September 15, 2005, AA terminated Anderson's employment for

insubordination based on her refusal to follow AA's directives to cease contacting Dr.

Brown.

25. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that she had a legal

right to contact Dr. Brown for purposes of requesting her medical records; that AA's

repeated directives dated May 12, 2004, March 4,18,28, August 30.2005 were illegal

harassment; that AA's termination of her employment on September 15, 2005.

constituted unlawful employment discrimination under FEHA, wrongfiil termination in

violation of public policy and interfered with exercise of her civil lights.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Unlawful Employment Harassment Discrimination and Retaliation Under FEHA)

California Government Code Section 12940 et seq.

26. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1-25, as if fully alleged herein.

27. Plaintiff alleges:

(a) AA's actions of taking Anderson off the line on September 4,2003, because

AA regarded her as "psychiatrically unsound" constitutes an unlawful employment

practice under California Government Code Section 12940 et seq. in that (i) AA

unlawfully discriminated against Anderson in that AA regarded as having an actual or

perceived mental disability which limited a major life activity—working; (ii) AA

unlawfully retaliated against Anderson for reporting Hoffman's assault on her person and

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASENO.C05-04292SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 10 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 10 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273820 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 11/16

I!

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

L I

12

13

14

1.5

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I reference to Anderson as a "tall blonde" to the AA Event Hotline and other personnel I

I' during the investigation of the August 21.2003 incident: (lift AA committed unlawful

harassment under FEHA based on mental disability and sex: and (iv) AA discriminatorily

handled Anderson's report regarding Hoffman's assault on her person on the basis of sex

and retaliation for reporting Hoffman's assault:

(b) AA's decision to force Anderson into psychiatric counseling as of August 25,

2003, based on her following AA procedure and protocol, including contacting AA's

Event Hotline to report Hoffman's assault on her person and reference to Anderson as a

<4tall blonde" constitutes harassment and retaliation under FEHA based on mental

disability and sex:

i (c) AA's suspension of Anderson's employment effective October 15, 2003.

without pay, was discriminatory, retaliatory, and constituted unlawful harassment in

violation of FEHA based on perceived mental disability;

(d) AA's order that Anderson undergo psychiatric evaluation with Dr. Brown on

March 9 and 10,2004, under threat of termination, was discriminatory, retaliatory and

constituted unlawful harassment in violation of FEHA based on perceived mental

disability and sex and was without job related justification:

(c) AA's ordering Anderson into psychiatric counseling and treatment plan with a

board certified psychiatrist, under threat of termination, was discriminatory, retaliatory

and constituted unlawful harassment in violation of FEHA based on perceived mental

disability and sex and without job related justification;

(f) AA's written directives issued to Anderson dated May 12, 2004, March 4,18,

28, August 30.2005 directing Anderson to cease communications with Dr. Brown's

office, under threat of termination, was discriminatory, retaliatory and constituted

unlawful harassment in violation of FEHA based on perceived medical disability and sex

and was without job related justification in that Anderson had a legal right under

Virginia, Nevada, California and federal law to contact Dr. Brown's office to obtain

7

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASENO,CQ5-04292SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 11 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 11 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273028 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 12/16

I

I

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

[j copies of her medical records: and

I! (g) AA's termination of Anderson's employment on September 15,2005. for

I) insubordination based on her refusal to cease communications with Dr. Brown's office

H :

I! For ourposes of requestine her medical records was discriminatory, retaliatory an.d

H ' ' - .. .

II constituted unlawful harassment in violation of FEHA based on nerceived medical

is

!! disability and sex.

28. As a direct and proximate result of AA's unlawful employment practices as

alleged in Paragraph 27 above. Anderson has and will continue to suffer loss of wages in

an amount according to proof at trial in excess of 575,000.

[ 29. As a further and direct and proximate result of AA's unjawful employment

i

(practices as alleged in Paragraph 27 above. Anderson has and continuesio suffer

i emotional distress and mental anguish in an amount according io proof at trial in excess

I of $75.000.

i

i

30. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that the above-

| j referenced unlawful employment practices were done with malice, fraud., or oppression

j and subject AA to punitive damages. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and

i

j thereupon alleges that such unlawful employment practices were carried out by, or with

I ratification and/or authorization by. an officer, director or managing agent of AA with the

i!

j I intent to deprive Anderson of her leeal rights.

| 31. On June 10,2004. Anderson filed a timely Charge of Discrimination with the

I Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("First EEOC Charge"). A copy of the

Charge of Discrimination is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is incorporated by

I *

!! reference.

!

jz.. OQ or about June 10,2004, the LliOC through its worksharc agreement with

|t

11 the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing ("First DFEH Charge"), filed

11 a Charge of Discrimination with the DFEK

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES. INC.

CASE NO. C05-04292 ST

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 12 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 12 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 13/16

1

r

2!:

3 I!

33. On or about June 16. 2004. the DI'EH issued Anderson a Right-to-Sue letter

4

II ("First Right-to-Sue Letter") relating to the First DFEH Charge while the EEOC was

I! " '

j j investigating Anderson's First EEOC Charge of Discrimination. A copy of the First

DFEH Rieht-to-Sue Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit B and is ineornorated herein bv

reference.

10

II

12

13

14

15

16

1?

34. On October 27, 2004, the EEOC issued Anderson a Right-to-Sue letter ("First

j EEOC Right-to-Sue Letter") relating to her First EEOC Charge. A copy of the First

F.EOC Right-to-Sue Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit C and is incorporated herein by

I reference.

I 35, Prior lo June 16, 2005, an EEOC representative advised Anderson that she

\

1 had until late October 2005 to file suit against AA. In reliance on this representationt Anderson did not file suit, while pro per, unlil October 21, 2005. Plaintiff alleges thai,

\

18

1!

19 l!

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

under the doctrine of equitable tolling, her complaint was timely filed.

36. On or about . Anderson filed another Charge of Discrimination

with the EEOC ("Second EEOC Charge"). A copy of the Second EEOC Charge is

attached hereto as Exhibit D.

37, On or about

ii

, the EEOC though its vvorkshare agreement with the

California Department of Fair Employment & Housing filed a Charge of Discrimination

with the DFEH ("Second DFEH Charge*),

38. On or about June 31,2006. the EEOC issued Andersen another Right-to-Sue

i

1 letter ("Second EEOC Right-to-Sue Letter") relating to her Second EEOC Charge. A

| copy of the Second EEOC Right-to-Suc Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit E and is

J, incoiporated herein by reference.

i

t

j 39. On or about __„ the DFEH issued Anderson another Right-to-Sue letter

i

j ("Second DFttH Right-to-Sue Letter") relating to her Second DFEH Charge. A copy of

! V

i HIRST AMIiNDtlD COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES. INC.

CASEWXC05-04292SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 13 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 13 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 14/16

i

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

the Second DFEH Right-to-Sue Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit F and is incorporated

herein by reference.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereafter set forth.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy)

40. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1-39, inclusive, as if fully

alleged herein.

41. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that AA's termination

of Anderson's employment on September 15,2005, was in violation of public policy

embodied in California Government Code Sections 12926, 12940 and 45 CFR

{164.524(b)(li.

\

I;

42. As a direct and proximate result of AA's wrongful termination of Anderson's

employment in violation of public policy, Anderson has and will continue lo suffer loss

of wages and other employment benefits in an amount according to proof at trial in

excess of $75.000.

43. As a further and direct and proximate result of AA's wrongful termination of

Anderson's employment in violation of public policy. Anderson has and continues to

suffer emotional distress and mental anguish in an amount according to proof at trial in

excess of $75,000.

44. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that the abovereferenced wrongful termination of Anderson's employment in violation of public policywas done with malice., fraud, or oppression and subject AA to punitive damages.

Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereupon alleges that such wrongful

termination was carried out by, or with ratification and/or authorization by, an officer,,

director or managing agent of AA with the intent to deprive Anderson of her legal rights,

iu

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASE NO. C05-04292 SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 14 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 14 of 16
07/12/2006 12:25 9254273028 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 15/16

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

j j WHEREFORE. Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereafter set forth.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Interference/Attempted Interference With Exercise Of Civil Rights)

(Tom Bane Civil Rights Act—California Civil Code Section 52 J)

45. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1-44, inclusive, as if fully

alleged herein.

46. AA's written directives issued to Anderson dated May 12,2004, March 4, IS,

28, August 30,2005 directing Anderson to cease communications with Dr. Brown's

office, under threat of termination or other job related reprisal, and termination of her

employment cm September 15,2005. constituted threats, intimidation and/or coercion

which attempted to interfere with and did interfere with Anderson's exercise and

j enjoyment of her rights secured by the laws of United States to wit: 45 CFR

I64.524(b)(1).

47. As a direct and proximate result of AA's interference or attempted

interference with Anderson's exercise of rights secured under the laws of the United

States, Anderson was terminated from employment for refusing to relinquish such

secured legal rights and has and continues to suffer loss of wages and other employment

benefits in an amount according to proof at trial in excess of $75.,000.

48. As a further and direct and proximate result of AA's interference or attempted

interference with Anderson's exercise of rights secured under the laws of the United

States, Anderson has and continues to suffer emotional distress and mental anguish in an

amount according to proof at trial in excess of $75,000.

49. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that the abovereferenced interference or attempted interference with Anderson's exercise of rights

secured under the laws of the United States was done with malice, fraud, or oppression

y

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.

CASF, Nf). C05-04292 Sf

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 15 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 15 of 16
07/12/2006 12:26 9254273020 JOHNSON LAW FIRM PAGE 16/16

1

4

i and subject AA to punitive damages. Plaintiff is farther informed and believes and

:

I thereupon alleges that interference or attempted interference was carried out by. or with

ratification and/or authorization by. an officer, director or managing agent of AA with the

intent to deprive Anderson of her legal rights.

5

\

6 ]

,11

7

!l

8 j

9 !

10

"if

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereafter sel forth.

1. For Loss of Wages, past and future, in an amount according to proof at trial;

2. Emotional distress damages in an amount according to proof at trial;

3. An award of costs of suit:

4. An award of attorney's tees on the First and Third Causes of Action; and

5. Ail additional and further relief the court may deem appropriate.

Dated: June 29.2006

GREGORY S. REDMOND, ESQ.

Attorney for Plaintiff

uT*eu!. Ajiwcrscn

i^

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

ANDERSON V. AMERICAN AIRLINES. INC.

CASENO.C05-(M292SI

Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 34 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 16 of 16
 Case 3:05-cv-04292-SI Document 36 Filed 07/20/06 Page 16 of 16