1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

ROBERT SMITH, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) Civil Action No. 

 ) 

 ) 

ROSEBUD FARMSTAND, ROCKY MENDOZA,) 

CARLOS CASTANEDA, PABLO VELASCO, ) 

ORLANDO ALARCON, LUIS ARAMBULA, ) 

MARCOS ROMERO, FREDERICO LOPEZ ) 

JOSÉ G MARTINEZ ) Honorable Judge 

 ) Jury Demand 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

Complaint 

Introduction 

1. The plaintiff sues Rosebud Farmstand for sexual harassment, racial 

harassment, constructive discharge and retaliation under Title VII, 42 USC 

§1981 and for acts under the Illinois Gender Violence Act, 740 ILCS 82/5. 

2. The plaintiff sues Rocky Mendoza(shift manager), Carlos Castaneda(store 

manager), and coworkers, Pablo Velasco, Orlando Alarcon, Luis Arambula, 

Marcos Romero, Frederico Lopez and Jose G. Martinez(Chaleco) for sexual 

harassment, retaliation and/or racial harassment under 42 USC §1981 and the 

Illinois Gender Violence Act, 740 ILCS 82/5. 

EEOC's Determination of Substantial Evidence 

3. On or about 19 August 2011, the EEOC determined that reasonable cause 

existed that Rosebud Farmstand subjected the plaintiff to harassment and 

constructive discharge, violating Title VII. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1
2

Exhausting Administrative Proceedings

4. The plaintiff has satisfied all conditions precedent to the filing of his lawsuit. The 

EEOC's notice of right to sue of 26 September 2011 is attached. 

Jurisdiction and Venue

5. This Court has jurisdiction under §706(f) (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 

1964, as amended [42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(3)], under §§1331 and 1343 of the 

Judicial Code [28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1343] and has supplemental jurisdiction 

under §1367 of the Judicial Code [28 U.S.C. §1367].

6. As the acts and/or omissions occurred in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern 

Division, venue is proper by §1391(b) of the Judicial Code [28U.S.C. §1391(b)]. 

Facts 

7. On or about 14 November 2003, the plaintiff began working for Rosebud 

Farmstand as a butcher in the defendant's meat department. 

8. Before and after 2007, the defendant's male employees would touch the 

plaintiff's private parts. 

9. Such employees include the defendant's managers, namely, Rocky Mandoza 

(assistant manager), Carlos Castaneda (manager). 

10. Such employees also include the plaintiff's coworkers, namely, Pablo Velasco, 

Orlando Alarcon, Luis Arambula, Marcos Romero, Frederico Lopez and Jose 

G. Martinez(Chaleco). 

11. The defendant's employees repeatedly grabbed and fondled the plaintiff's penis 

and testicles. 

12. Also, the defendant's employees would grab and slap the plaintiff's buttocks. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 2 of 13 PageID #:2
3

13. The defendant's employees would say, niggers have big dicks and big asses. 

14. Also, the defendant's employees would refer to the plaintiff as a nigger, monkey 

and an Ethiopian. 

15. Moreover, the defendant's employees told the plaintiff to go back to Africa. 

16. On several occasions, the plaintiff complained to manager Rocky and manager 

Carlos about the sexual harassment and racial harassment, but they did 

nothing to stop the continuing sexual harassment and racial harassment. 

17. Indeed, manager Rocky Mendoza and manager Carlos Castaneda participated 

in harassing the plaintiff. 

18. Also, on several occasions, the plaintiff requested that each of the defendant's 

employees harassing the plaintiff stop, but they continued nevertheless. 

19. The plaintiff informed each of the defendant's employees that their harassment 

was disturbing to the plaintiff and did not want them to touch him. 

20. However, the defendant's employees ignored the plaintiff and continued to 

harass him. 

21. On a few occasions prior to 13 December 2007, the plaintiff had reminded 

manager Rocky Mendoza that manager Mendoza had approved the plaintiff to 

take the day off on 13 December 2007 for dental work. 

22. On 15 December 2007, manager Carlos Castaneda and/or manager Rocky 

Mendoza suspended the plaintiff for nine days for failing to report to work on 13 

December 2007. 

23. On or about 23 December 2007, Rosebud Farmstand reduced the plaintiff's 

average hours of 34 hours per week to an average of 30 hours per week. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 3 of 13 PageID #:3
4

24. On or about 7 January 2008, the plaintiff executed a charge of discrimination 

with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and EEOC. 

25. In 2008 after the plaintiff's EEOC charge of 7 January 2008, until the plaintiff 

terminated his employment in June 2008, the defendants would ignore the 

plaintiff, give him the cold shoulder, exclude him from meetings, scratch his 

car, slash his tires, expose meat knives threateningly and so forth. 

26. In or about June 2008, the plaintiff terminated his employment because, 

effectively, Rosebud Farmstand constructively discharged the plaintiff by 

making his working conditions intolerable. 

Count I – Sexual Harassment 

27. The plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-12, 16-20. 

Title VII 

28. At all times when defendant employed the plaintiff, Rosebud Farmstand was an 

“employer” within the definition of §701(b) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 

[42 U.S.C. §2000 e(b)]. 

29. At all times when the plaintiff was employed by Rosebud Farmstand, the 

plaintiff was an “employee” within the definition of §701(f) of Title VII of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. §2000e(f)]. 

Sexual harassment 

30. Rosebud through its agents and by its actions and/or omission discriminated 

against the plaintiff based upon his sex in the terms and conditions of his 

employment. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 4 of 13 PageID #:4
5

Damages 

31. As a proximate result of this discrimination, the plaintiff suffered damages, 

including, but not limited to, lost wages, lost employment benefits, suffered pain, 

loss of self-esteem, loss of enjoyment of life, worthlessness and suffered other 

damages. 

32. Rosebud discriminated against the plaintiff with malice or reckless indifference 

to his federally protected rights. 

33. To deter future malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights 

of employees by the defendant and other employers and to punish the defendant 

for their malice or reckless indifference to the plaintiff's federally protected rights, 

exemplary damages are appropriate. 

Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that the court: 

I) Will order the defendant to post appropriate notices regarding their legal duties to 

refrain from discriminating against employees based upon sex 

II) Will enjoin the defendant from continuing to discriminate employees because of sex 

III) Will reinstate the plaintiff to his position or a comparable position or, alternatively, 

pay for such position for a reasonable time thereafter 

IV) Will order the defendant to pay prejudgment interest at the prevailing rate on the 

award of back pay, lost employment benefits and other compensation lost to the plaintiff 

because of the defendant's discrimination against him based upon his sex, 

V) Will order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for damages which he suffered 

resulting from the defendant discriminating against him because of his sex, including, 

but not limited to, humiliation, embarrassment, insult, loss of enjoyment of life, 

worthlessness, loss of self-esteem and emotional suffering, 

VI) Order the defendant to pay punitive damages, 

VII) Order the defendant to pay attorney's fees, expert witness fees, expenses and 

costs of this lawsuit and of any prior administrative action and 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 5 of 13 PageID #:5
6

VIII) Order the defendant to pay or provide other relief as this Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Count II Racial Harassment 

34. The plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶ 1-7, 13-20, 28, 29. 

35. Rosebud through its agents and by the actions and/or omission discriminated 

against the plaintiff based upon his race in the terms and conditions of his 

employment, violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or for 

participating in a Charge of Discrimination before the EEOC. 

36. The defendant's employees would harass racially the plaintiff. 

37. Such employees include the defendant's managers, namely, Rocky Mandoza 

(assistant manager), Carlos Castaneda (manager). 

38. Such employees also include the plaintiff's coworkers, namely, Pablo Velasco, 

Orlando Alarcon, Luis Arambula, Marcos Romero, Frederico Lopez and Jose G. 

Martinez(Chaleco). 

Damages 

39. As a proximate result of this discrimination, the plaintiff suffered damages, 

including, but not limited to, lost wages, lost employment benefits, suffered pain, 

loss of self-esteem, loss of enjoyment of life, worthlessness and suffered other 

damages. 

40. Rosebud discriminated against the plaintiff with malice or reckless indifference 

to his federally protected rights. 

41. To deter future malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights 

of employees by the defendant and other employers and to punish the defendant 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 6 of 13 PageID #:6
7

for their malice or reckless indifference to the plaintiff's federally protected rights, 

exemplary damages are appropriate. 

Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that the court: 

I) Will order the defendant to post appropriate notices regarding their legal duties to 

refrain from discriminating against employees based upon race, 

II) Will enjoin the defendant from continuing to discriminate employees because of race, 

III) Will reinstate the plaintiff to his position or a comparable position or, alternatively, 

pay for such position for a reasonable time thereafter 

IV) Will order the defendant to pay prejudgment interest at the prevailing rate on the 

award of back pay, lost employment benefits and other compensation lost to the plaintiff 

because of the defendant's discrimination against him based upon his race, 

V) Will order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for damages which he suffered 

resulting from the defendant discriminating against him because of his race, including, 

but not limited to, humiliation, embarrassment, insult, loss of enjoyment of life, 

worthlessness, loss of self-esteem and emotional suffering, 

VI) Order the defendant to pay punitive damages, 

VII) Order the defendant to pay attorney's fees, expert witness fees, expenses and 

costs of this lawsuit and of any prior administrative action and 

VIII) Order the defendant to pay or provide other relief as this Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Count Retaliation III 

42. The plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶ 1-25, 28, 29. 

43. The defendant, by its acts and/or omissions, retaliated against the plaintiff for 

opposing sexual and racial harassment in the terms and conditions of his 

employment violating the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or for 

participating in a Charge of Discrimination before the EEOC. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 7 of 13 PageID #:7
8

Damages 

44. As a proximate result of this retaliation, the plaintiff suffered damages. 

45. The defendant retaliated against the plaintiff with malice or reckless indifference 

to his federally protected rights. 

46. Deterring future malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights 

of employees by the defendant and other employers and to punish the 

defendant for their malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected 

rights of the plaintiff, exemplary damages are appropriate against the 

defendant. 

Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that the court: 

I) Will order the defendant to post appropriate notices regarding their legal duties to 

refrain from retaliating against employees exercising their rights, 

II) Will enjoin the defendant from continuing to retaliate against employees exercising 

their rights, 

III) Will reinstate the plaintiff to his position or a comparable position or, alternatively, 

pay for such position for a reasonable time thereafter 

IV) Will order the defendant to pay prejudgment interest at the prevailing rate on the 

award of back pay, lost employment benefits and other compensation lost to the plaintiff 

because of the defendant's retaliation against the plaintiff for exercising his rights, 

V) Will order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for damages which he suffered 

resulting from the defendant retaliating against him, including, but not limited to, 

humiliation, embarrassment, insult, loss of enjoyment of life, worthlessness, loss of selfesteem and emotional suffering, 

VI) Order the defendant to pay punitive damages, 

VII) Order the defendant to pay attorney's fees, expert witness fees, expenses and 

costs of this lawsuit and of any prior administrative action and 

VIII) Order the defendant to pay or provide other relief as this Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 8 of 13 PageID #:8
9

Count IV Constructive Discharge 

47. The plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶ 1-26, 28, 29. 

48. Rosebud through its agents and by the actions and/or omission constructively 

discharged the plaintiff based upon his sex, race and in retaliation relating to the 

terms and conditions of his employment, violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 

1964 and/or for participating in a Charge of Discrimination before the EEOC. 

Damages 

49. As a proximate result of this retaliation, the plaintiff suffered damages. 

50. The defendant retaliated against the plaintiff with malice or reckless indifference 

to his federally protected rights. 

51. Deterring future malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights 

of employees by the defendant and other employers and to punish the 

defendant for their malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected 

rights of the plaintiff, exemplary damages are appropriate against the 

defendant. 

Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that the court: 

I) Will order the defendant to post appropriate notices regarding their legal duties to 

refrain from constructively discharging employees exercising their rights, 

II) Will enjoin the defendant from continuing to constructively discharge employees 

exercising their rights, 

III) Will reinstate the plaintiff to his position or a comparable position or, alternatively, 

pay for such position for a reasonable time thereafter 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 9 of 13 PageID #:9
10

IV) Will order the defendant to pay prejudgment interest at the prevailing rate on the 

award of back pay, lost employment benefits and other compensation lost to the plaintiff 

because of the defendant's constructive discharge of the plaintiff for exercising his 

rights, 

V) Will order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for damages which he suffered 

resulting from the defendant retaliating against him, including, but not limited to, 

humiliation, embarrassment, insult, loss of enjoyment of life, worthlessness, loss of selfesteem and emotional suffering, 

VI) Order the defendant to pay punitive damages, 

VII) order the defendant to pay attorney's fees, expert witness fees, expenses and costs 

of this lawsuit and of any prior administrative action and 

VIII) Order the defendant to pay or provide other relief as this Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Count V– Illinois Gender Violence Act

52. The plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-12, 16-20. 

53. Rosebud Farmstand through its employees committed acts against the plaintiff 

violating the Illinois Gender Violence Act. 

54. Aside from Rosebud Farmstand, other defendants committed acts against the 

plaintiff violating the Illinois Gender Violence Act. 

55. Such defendants are Rocky Mandoza (assistant manager), Carlos Castaneda 

(manager). 

56. Also, such defendants include the plaintiff's coworkers, namely, Pablo Velasco, 

Orlando Alarcon, Luis Arambula, Marcos Romero, Frederico Lopez and Jose G. 

Martinez(Chaleco). 

57. The defendant’s acts of violence or physical aggression were committed, at 

least in part, based upon the plaintiff’s sex. 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 10 of 13 PageID #:10
11

58. The defendants subjected the plaintiff to physical intrusions or invasions of a 

sexual nature. 

59. The defendants subjected the plaintiff to gender related violence as defined in 

Section 5 of the Gender Violence Act, 740 ILCS 82/5. 

Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that this court will enter judgment favoring the plaintiff and 

against the defendants for: 

I). An amount to fully and justly compensate him for the damages he suffered, 

II). Exemplary damages, 

III). Reasonable attorney’s fees and the costs and expenses of this action, and 

IV). Such other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate. 

Count VI: §1981 claims against all defendants, 

60. The plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous allegations of the complaint, 

including, but not limited to, ¶ 1-7, 13-20. 

61. Rosebud through its agents and by the actions and/or omission discriminated 

against the plaintiff based upon his race in the terms and conditions of his 

employment, violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or for 

participating in a Charge of Discrimination before the EEOC. 

62. The defendant's employees would harass racially the plaintiff. 

63. Rocky Mandoza (assistant manager), Carlos Castaneda (manager) would 

racially harassed the plaintiff. 

64. Others would also racially harassed the plaintiff, including, Pablo Velasco, 

Orlando Alarcon, Luis Arambula, Marcos Romero, Frederico Lopez and Jose G. 

Martinez(Chaleco). 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 11 of 13 PageID #:11
12

65. Aside from racially harassing the plaintiff, the defendants retaliated against the 

plaintiff for complaining against racial harassment, including, but not limited to, 

filing an administrative charge with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and/or 

the EEOC. 

66. Because the defendants made the plaintiff's work environment intolerable, the 

defendants participated in or caused the plaintiff to be constructively discharged. 

Damages 

67. As a proximate result of this discrimination and retaliation, the plaintiff suffered 

damages, including, but not limited to, lost wages, lost employment benefits, 

suffered pain, loss of self-esteem, loss of enjoyment of life, worthlessness and 

suffered other damages. 

68. The defendants discriminated and retaliated against the plaintiff with malice or 

reckless indifference to his federally protected rights. 

69. To deter future malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights 

of employees by the defendant and other employers and to punish the defendants 

for their malice or reckless indifference to the plaintiff's federally protected rights, 

exemplary damages are appropriate. 

Wherefore, the plaintiff prays that the court: 

I) Will order the defendant to post appropriate notices regarding their legal duties to 

refrain from discriminating and retaliating against employees based upon race, 

II) Will enjoin the defendant from continuing to discriminate and retaliating employees 

because of race, 

III) Will reinstate the plaintiff to his position or a comparable position or, alternatively, 

pay for such position for a reasonable time thereafter 

IV) Will order the defendant to pay prejudgment interest at the prevailing rate on the 

award of back pay, lost employment benefits and other compensation lost to the plaintiff 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 12 of 13 PageID #:12
13

because of the defendant's discrimination and retaliation against him because of his 

race, 

V) Will order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for damages which he suffered 

resulting from the defendant discriminating against him because of his race, including, 

but not limited to, humiliation, embarrassment, insult, loss of enjoyment of life, 

worthlessness, loss of self-esteem and emotional suffering, 

VI) Order the defendant to pay punitive damages, 

VII) Order the defendant to pay attorney's fees, expert witness fees, expenses and 

costs of this lawsuit and of any prior administrative action and 

VIII) Order the defendant to pay or provide other relief as this Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 ______________________________ 

 Joseph A. Longo 

LONGO AND ASSOCIATES LTD. 

Joseph A. Longo, Esq. 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

2100 West Haven 

Mt. Prospect, IL 60056 

(847) 640-9490 

Longo-Associates@SBCglobal.net 

Attorney No. 53635 

Case: 1:11-cv-09147 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/23/11 Page 13 of 13 PageID #:13