SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 1

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

Daniel Kalish, OSB No. 111529

Jason A Rittereiser, (pro hac vice application forthcoming)

Shemia Fagan, OSBA No. 093476

HKM Employment Attorneys LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, OR 97204

Tel: (503) 389-1130

dkalish@hkm.com

jrittereiser@hkm.com 

sfagan@hkm.com

Of Attorneys for Plaintiff Coty Richardson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

EUGENE DIVISION

COTY RICHARDSON,

Plaintiff,

vs.

NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY, 

an Oregon Corporation,

Defendant.

 Case NO. 6:15-cv-01886-AA

SECOND AMENDED 

COMPLAINT 

Prayer Amount $ 9,999,999

ORS 21.160(1)(c)

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiff COTY RICHARDSON alleges against Defendant NORTHWEST 

CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1.

Coty Richardson was an Assistant Professor at Northwest Christian University where 

she taught in the Exercise Science program. On July 22, 2015, she was fired for becoming 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 1 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 2

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

pregnant out of wedlock. 

2.

As a single mother, Ms. Richardson has been in a 12-year relationship with a man 

who resides in the state of Washington. Ms. Richardson and her partner learned that they are

expecting their first child together, due this November. After learning of her pregnancy, Ms. 

Richardson notified the University, including Dr. Dennis Lindsay, Vice President for 

Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty, to address any scheduling conflicts that her maternity 

may have had in the upcoming fall semester. Instead of supporting her pregnancy, the 

University singled out Ms. Richardson as unmarried and gave her an ultimatum: she had to 

either (1) proclaim the pregnancy a mistake and dissociate with the father of her child or (2) 

marry him immediately and provide proof of their union. Dr. Lindsay told Ms. Richardson

that having a child out of wedlock while still continuing a relationship with the father was 

inconsistent with the University’s core values and mission and set a “bad example” for the 

students. When Ms. Richardson refused the University’s demands and requested privacy in 

her personal life, she was locked out of the University and her employment was terminated. 

II. PARTIES

3.

Plaintiff Coty Richardson (“Ms. Richardson”) is an individual residing in Lane 

County, Oregon. She was employed by Northwest Christian University as an Assistant 

Professor of Exercise Science from approximately August 2011 to July 22, 2015. 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 2 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 3

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

4.

Defendant Northwest Christian University (“NCU”) is an Oregon corporation that

transacts business in Lane County and throughout Oregon and has its principal place of 

business in Eugene. NCU is an “employer” subject to state and federal statutes governing 

employment discrimination including ORS 659A and 42 U.S.C. §12111, and is responsible 

for the acts and omissions of its officers, supervisors, and employees.

III. JURISDICTION

5.

The Circuit Court of the State of Oregon has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 

ORS 14.030, and because NCU is an Oregon corporation and has purposefully availed itself 

of the privileges of doing business in Lane County. NCU employed Plaintiff in Oregon, and 

the causes of action complained of herein arise under Oregon civil rights and wage statutes, 

the common law torts of intentional infliction of emotional distress and wrongful 

termination, the theories of breach of contract and specific promises in specific situations, 

and under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended. 

IV.EXHAUSTED ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

6.

Ms. Richardson filed a charge of discrimination with the United States Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission. On September 4, 2015, the EEOC issued a Notice 

of Right to Sue, providing that the lawsuit under Title VII of the United States Civil Rights 

Act must be filed within 90 days of receipt of said “right to sue” notice. Plaintiff therefore 

has exhausted her administrative remedies. 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 3 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 4

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

V. VENUE

7.

At all times material to this action Defendant NCU conducted business in the state of 

Oregon. NCU’s principal location is located at 828 East 11th Ave, Eugene, OR 97401.

8.

All or a substantial portion of the acts complained of herein occurred in Lane County, 

Oregon. Venue is proper pursuant to ORS 14.050 and 14.080. 

VI. FACTS

9.

NCU is a private Christian University located in Eugene that has been educating 

students for nearly 120 years. While considered a “Christ-centered community,” NCU 

“welcome(s) students who have no faith commitment or are from other faith commitments,” 

and “is not a ‘church,’ nor . . . [does it] require students to be Christians or to subscribe to 

any faith statement.” NCU prides itself on providing “a transformational educational 

experience that champions wisdom, faith and service,” and promotes “an environment of 

openness, freedom of expression, and respect for one another.” 

10.

NCU hires faculty according to their expertise within their field, their commitment to 

and excellence in teaching, and their potential to promote student growth and learning. The 

employment of faculty is the responsibility of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and 

Dean of the Faculty. 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 4 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 5

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

11.

NCU makes a commitment to its faculty and maintains a policy prohibiting 

discrimination in the employment and treatment of its employees: “The University’s policy 

is not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of age, 

race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, or 

any other protected class with respect to hiring, promotion, demotion, transfer, recruitment, 

or termination.” 

12.

Ms. Richardson is highly educated and holds a degree in nutrition science and a 

master’s degree in kinesiology. She was attracted to NCU because the University combines

not only strong academics, but also a commitment to faith. 

13.

Ms. Richardson’s faith is incredibly important to her. When hired by NCU, Ms. 

Richardson provided a “Faith Statement” required by the University. In her statement Ms. 

Richardson gives thanks to God “for all of the blessings in my life, the truths, the lessons, 

even the struggles because without those I would not truly appreciate the beautiful grace of 

God in my life that I have allowed to take hold of my heart and mind and body and soul.”

14.

In 2011, as a result of her expertise in her field of exercise science, Ms. Richardson

was hired by NCU, first as an Instructor. Ms. Richardson had great respect for NCU, its 

values, its mission, and its goals. She loved her job, and she enjoyed the challenge of 

teaching.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 5 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 6

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

15.

At the start of her employment, Ms. Richardson was given a Faculty Handbook and a 

Staff and Faculty Personnel Manual. These state that NCU maintains a “discrimination and 

harassment-free environment where people treat one another with respect.” The handbook 

specifically said that it is NCU’s policy “not to discriminate against any employee . . . 

because of . . . sex . . . marital status . . . or any other protected class with respect to hiring, 

promotion, demotion, transfer, recruitment, and termination.” The handbook provides for 

specific procedures for termination, including a right to be notified and to meet with a faculty 

review panel.

16.

By all accounts, Ms. Richardson was an excellent Instructor and NCU was very 

happy with her performance. After just one year, she was promoted to a full-time faculty 

position. Her employment reviews have been superlative, both from supervisors and from 

students, and she was consistently recognized for her dedication, performance, and skills. 

She loved her job, and NCU likewise thought highly of her.

17.

In February 2015, Ms. Richardson was promoted again to the position of Assistant 

Professor of Exercise Science. She was provided a faculty employment contract with NCU

for the academic year 2015-2016. The contract was executed on February 25, 2015 with a 

commencement date of August 15, 2015. It was a continuing contract for nine months, and 

appointed Ms. Richardson to serve as an Assistant Professor of Exercise Science with a full 

teaching load. This employment agreement was signed by 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 6 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 7

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

her, the President of the University, the Vice President for Finance, and the Vice President of 

Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty, Dr. Dennis Lindsay. 

18.

This faculty contract states that the parties must abide by the conditions stated in the 

Faculty Handbook and the Staff and Faculty Personnel Manual. The handbook indicates that 

NCU would not discriminate against her as a result of her sex, her marital status, or any other 

protected status. Relying on these statements in the handbook, Ms. Richardson believed that

she would not be discriminated against as a result of her marital status, gender, pregnancy, or 

religion.

19.

Ms. Richardson is a single mother of two children. For the past twelve years, she has 

been in a committed relationship with a man who lives in the state of Washington. They love 

each other and have discussed marriage several times.

20.

In early 2015, Ms. Richardson became pregnant with their first child. She and her 

partner discussed marriage, but felt that the time was not right, from a financial, emotional, 

and practical perspective. Instead, they made the decision to co-parent with the hope that one 

day they would get married. 

21.

In May 2015, Ms. Richardson notified the University that she was pregnant in order 

to ensure that her maternity would not cause any scheduling issues for the fall semester. She 

emailed Hieke McNiel, the Program Director for Exercise 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 7 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 8

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

Science, as well as Dr. Dennis Lindsay, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of 

Faculty. Ms. Richardson explained that her due date was in late November, and she provided 

some suggestions (e.g., take-home exams) on how to handle the last few weeks of the 

semester if she were out on maternity leave.

22.

NCU’s response was swift, blunt, and unequivocal. Dr. Lindsay scheduled a meeting 

with Ms. Richardson, and in that meeting, emphasized that the “scheduling” issues were not 

“the problem” with her pregnancy. According to him, the issue was that she was going to be 

“showing” soon and that many of the students and staff would start to “ask questions.” Dr.

Lindsay then demanded that she explain the status of her relationship with her partner. 

23.

Ms. Richardson felt very uncomfortable talking about her personal life, but felt 

incredible pressure to respond. She told Dr. Lindsay that she was not married to the father of 

her child, but that they loved each other, and they hoped to get married in the future. That 

answer did not satisfy Dr. Lindsay. 

24.

In response, Dr. Lindsay gave Ms. Richardson an ultimatum: she could either (1) 

declare the pregnancy a mistake and end the relationship with her partner, the father of her 

unborn child, or (2) get married to him and provide proof to Dr. Lindsay of their union. If 

Ms. Richardson did not do either of these by the end of August, her employment with NCU 

would be terminated. According to Dr. Lindsay, having a child out of wedlock while still 

continuing a relationship with the child’s father was 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 8 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 9

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

inconsistent with the University’s core values and mission and set a bad example for 

students.

25.

Ms. Richardson was mortified and crushed. Her career was being threatened because 

she became pregnant and refused to cut ties with the father of her child and her partner of 

twelve years. They live in different states because of their jobs, and they did not feel it was 

the right time for them to marry. As a single mother of two children with a third on the way, 

Ms. Richardson was distraught at the thought of losing her health insurance, benefits, and 

source of income. 

26.

Despite giving her until the end of August to decide what to do, Dr. Lindsay called 

Ms. Richardson multiple times to inquire of her decision. He left a voicemail for her asking 

whether she had decided to end her relationship with her partner or marry him. 

27.

In response, Ms. Richardson communicated with Dr. Lindsay several times to tell him 

that her decisions about her pregnancy and her relationship with her partner were personal 

matters that have nothing to do with her employment and exemplary performance at NCU. 

On July 6, 2015 Dr. Lindsay informed Ms. Richardson that she had seven days to decide 

whether to cut ties with her partner or marry him. On July 14, 2015, Ms. Richardson sent Dr. 

Lindsay a letter requesting privacy on the matter and expressing her wish not to discuss her 

personal life and circumstances. 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 9 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 10

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

28.

On July 28 2015, Ms. Richardson tried to log into her work email, but she was denied 

access. She called the IT Department and was told that her account had been disabled and 

that she had been re-classified as a “former employee.” Apologetically, the IT person said, 

“Dr. Lindsay hasn’t talked to you about your situation yet?” 

29.

Two days later, Ms. Richardson received a letter from NCU dated July 22, 2015,

informing her that the University’s “core values do not allow for the lifestyle which you have 

chosen and . . . intend to continue.” Then for the first time, Dr. Lindsay’s letter proclaims 

that, “sexual relations outside of marriage is [sic] contrary to the University’s core values,” 

and that “you are a single mother and your pregnancy would result in a very demonstrative 

violation of that core value.” Without providing Ms. Richardson an opportunity to present 

her case to a faculty review panel or engage in the proper process for termination, Dr. 

Lindsay concluded, “your employment with NCU is now at an end.” 

30.

NCU terminated Ms. Richardson because of her pregnancy, her gender, her marital 

status, and her religion. NCU has stated its intention to not pay Ms. Richardson according to 

her faculty contract for the 2015-16 school year. 

31.

This experience has been incredibly humiliating and confusing for Ms. Richardson. 

Already dealing with some complications with her pregnancy, while carrying her child Ms. 

Richardson now has suffered incredible emotional distress, 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 10 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 11

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

economic loss, and pain and confusion regarding the actions by NCU and Dr. Lindsay.

32.

According to Ms. Richardson’s understanding, male employees at NCU who have 

had children out of wedlock were not fired. Male employees who were expectant fathers, but 

not married, were not fired either. And married pregnant women clearly were not fired.

33.

As a result of NCU’s discriminatory conduct, Ms. Richardson has suffered and 

continues to suffer emotional distress and non-economic damages in an amount not to exceed 

$10,000,000.

34.

As a result of NCU’s discriminatory conduct, Ms. Richardson has suffered, and will 

suffer, economic loss in the amount of $150,000.

35.

NCU’s actions as described above were malicious and/or reckless and as a result, Ms. 

Richardson suffered significant damage and is entitled to the relief claimed below.

VII. CLAIMS

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Pregnancy Discrimination – ORS 659A.029 and ORS 659A.030)

36.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-35.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 11 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 12

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

37.

NCU violated ORS 659A.029 and 659A.030 by firing Ms. Richardson as a result of 

her pregnancy. On this claim, Ms. Richardson claims both disparate treatment discrimination 

and disparate impact discrimination.

38.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial but no 

greater than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory 

conduct in violation of ORS 659A.029 and 659A.030.

39.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward Plaintiff as a result of her pregnancy was 

malicious and/or reckless and Ms. Richardson is entitled to punitive damages.

40.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to ORS 659A.885 and ORS 20.107

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Sex/Gender Discrimination – ORS 659A.029 and ORS 659A.030)

41.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-40.

42.

NCU violated ORS 659A.029 and 659A.030 by firing Ms. Richardson as a result of 

her sex. Male employees who had children out of wedlock 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 12 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 13

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

were not fired. Male employees who had sex out of wedlock were not fired. Further, NCU’s 

policy is discriminatory on its face with respect to female employees because only women 

can get pregnant and there is no legal way for Defendant to know if a male employee has a

child out of wedlock. Further, NCU’s policy is discriminatory on its face with respect to 

female employees because only women can get pregnant and there is no legal way for 

Defendant to know if a male employee has had sex out of wedlock. On this claim, Ms. 

Richardson claims both disparate treatment discrimination and disparate impact 

discrimination.

43.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial but no 

greater than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory 

conduct in violation of ORS 659A.029 and 659A.030.

44.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward her as a result of her gender was malicious 

and/or reckless and Ms. Richardson is entitled to punitive damages.

45.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to ORS 659A.885 and ORS 20.107

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 13 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 14

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Marital Status Discrimination –ORS 659A.030)

46.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-45.

47.

NCU violated 659A.030 by firing Ms. Richardson as a result of her marital status. 

On this claim, Ms. Richardson claims both disparate treatment discrimination and disparate 

impact discrimination.

48.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial but no 

greate than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory 

conduct in violation of 659A.030.

49.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward her as a result of her marital status was 

malicious and/or reckless and Ms. Richardson is entitled to punitive damages.

50.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to ORS 659A.885 and ORS 20.107

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 14 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 15

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

FOURTH CLAIM OF RELIEF

(Religious Discrimination –ORS 659A.030)

51.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-50.

52.

NCU violated 659A.030 by firing Ms. Richardson as a result of her religious views, 

specifically her religious views that it is entirely appropriate for her, as a Christian, to wait 

until she and her partner are financially, practically, and emotionally ready to get married. 

On this claim, Ms. Richardson claims both disparate treatment discrimination and disparate 

impact discrimination.

53.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial but no 

greater than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory 

conduct in violation of 659A.030.

54.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward her as a result of her marital status was 

malicious and/or reckless and Ms. Richardson is entitled to punitive damages.

55.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to ORS 659A.885 and ORS 20.107.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 15 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

FIFTH CLAIM OF RELIEF

(Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy)

56.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-55.

57.

NCU wrongfully terminated Ms. Richardson in violation of an important public

policy of the state of Oregon, for exercising employment-related rights of public importance, 

and desiring to perform an important societal obligation or duty. 

58.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial but no 

greater than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s actions. 

59.

NCU’s wrongful termination of Plaintiff was malicious and/or reckless and Ms. 

Richardson is entitled to punitive damages.

SIXTH CLAIM OF RELIEF

(Repudiation of Contract)

60.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-59.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 16 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 17

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

61.

Ms. Richardson had an employment contract with NCU that provided that she could 

work for nine months commencing on August 15, 2015. The employment contract further 

stated that the parties had to abide by the Faculty Handbook, which stated, among other 

things, that NCU would not discriminate against her as a result of her marital status, her 

gender, or any other protected status.

62.

Ms. Richardson fulfilled her duties under the contract, but NCU has told her that it 

will not honor the contract as a result of, among other things, Ms. Richardson’s marital 

status, pregnancy status, and gender/sex.

63.

NCU violated Ms. Richardson’s contractual rights by firing her in violation of the 

express promises stated in her employment contract and in the Faculty Handbook. 

64.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $50,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breach of contract. 

SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)

65.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-64.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 17 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 18

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

66.

Based on the conduct described above, NCU engaged in outrageous conduct, with the 

intent of causing emotional distress or in reckless disregard of causing emotional distress, Ms. 

Richardson did suffer severe and/or extreme emotional distress, and the Defendant’s outrageous 

conduct was the actual and/or proximate cause of the emotional distress suffered by Ms. 

Richardson. 

67.

As a direct and proximate result of the discriminatory conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff 

has suffered non-economic harm in the form of emotional and mental distress, degradation, 

embarrassment, and humiliation, for which Plaintiff seeks compensation in the amount no 

greater than $10,000,000.

68.

NCU’s wrongful termination of Plaintiff was malicious and/or reckless and Ms. 

Richardson is entitled to punitive damages.

EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Violation of the Wage Statutes, ORS 652.150; ORS 652.200; ORS 653.055; ORS 652.230, 

ORS 652.240)

69.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-68.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 18 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 19

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

70.

Based on the conduct described above, NCU has repudiated its employment contract with 

Plaintiff. Her compensation in her employment contract is considered wages and, thus, NCU is 

now liable under the Oregon wage statutes. 

71.

As a result of NCU’s failure to pay the wages owed and due Plaintiff Richardson, 

Defendant NCU owes her her wages plus a month’s salary, along with reimbursement of her 

attorneys’ fees and costs. 

NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Violation of Specific Treatment in Specific Situations)

72.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-71.

73.

Ms. Richardson was provided a Faculty Handbook by NCU. This handbook stated 

that NCU would not discriminate against her as a result of her marital status her sex, or any 

other protected status. 

74.

Based on the Faculty Handbook, Ms. Richardson understood that NCU would not 

discriminate against her as a result of her marital status, gender, pregnancy status or religion. 

Further, the handbook said that she would not be terminated absent a faculty review of her 

situation. This handbook created an atmosphere of job 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 19 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 20

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

security for Ms. Richardson, and she was induced to remain at NCU as a result of the

promises stated in the faculty handbook.

75.

By firing Ms. Richardson as a result of her marital status, gender, pregnancy status, 

and/or religion, NCU breached its promises of specific treatment in specific situations. And 

by firing Ms. Richardson without giving her a review of a faculty panel, NCU breached its 

promises of specific treatment in specific situations.

76.

As a result of this breach, Ms. Richardson has suffered damages in an amount to be 

proved at trial. 

TENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Pregnancy Discrimination – Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq., 

by itself and as amended by the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act)

77.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-76.

78.

By firing Ms. Richardson as a result of her pregnancy, NCU violated Ms. 

Richardson’s rights under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended. 

On this claim, Ms. Richardson claims both disparate treatment discrimination and disparate 

impact discrimination.

79.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 20 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 21

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages of no greater than $10,000,000 as a direct 

and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory conduct in violation of Title VII of the 

1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended. 

80.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward Plaintiff as a result of her pregnancy was 

malicious and/or willful and/or reckless, and entitles Ms. Richardson to obtain punitive 

damages. 

81.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended. 

ELEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Sex/Gender Discrimination – Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 

2000e et seq., by itself and as amended)

82.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-81.

83.

NCU violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by firing Ms. Richardson as a 

result of her sex. Male employees who had children out of wedlock were not fired. Male 

employees who had sex out of wedlock were not fired. Further, NCU’s policy is 

discriminatory on its face with respect to female employees because only women can get 

pregnant and there is no legal way for Defendant to know if a male employee has a child out 

of wedlock. Further, NCU’s policy is discriminatory on its face with respect to female 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 21 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 22

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

employees because only women can get pregnant and there is no legal way for Defendant to 

know if a male employee has had sex out of wedlock. On this claim, Ms. Richardson claims 

both disparate treatment discrimination and disparate impact discrimination.

84.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial but no 

greater than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory 

conduct in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended. 

85.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward Plaintiff as a result of her sex was malicious 

and/or willful and/or reckless, entitling Ms. Richardson to obtain punitive damages. 

86.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended. 

TWELFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Religious Discrimination –Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 

42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq., by itself and as amended)

87.

Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-86.

88.

NCU violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended by 

firing Ms. Richardson as a result of her religious views, specifically her religious views that 

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 22 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 23

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

it is entirely appropriate for her, as a Christian, to wait until she and her partner are 

financially, practically, and emotionally ready to get married. On this claim, Ms. 

Richardson claims both disparate treatment discrimination and disparate impact 

discrimination.

89.

Plaintiff has suffered economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $150,000 and non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but no 

greater than $10,000,000 as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s discriminatory 

conduct in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and as amended.

90.

NCU’s discriminatory conduct toward Plaintiff as a result of her religious views was 

malicious and/or willful and/or reckless, entitling Ms. Richardson to obtain punitive 

damages. 

91.

Ms. Richardson is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees 

pursuant to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, by itself and amended. 

VIII. JURY DEMAND

92.

Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by this complaint.

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 23 of 25
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 24

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

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

IX.PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant and prays for:

A. Economic damages for past and future wages and benefits loss;

B. Non-economic damages for emotional distress; 

C. Reasonable attorneys’ fees and the costs as permitted by law;

D. Statutory pre-judgment interest; 

E. Compensation for any tax consequence associated with judgment;

F. Punitive damages;

G. Reinstatement; and

H. Such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

Dated this 11th day of December, 2015.

HKM Employment Attorneys LLP

/s/ Dan Kalish

Daniel Kalish, OSBA No. 111529

Jason Rittereiser (admitted pro hac vice)

Shemia Fagan, OSBA No. 093476

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 389-1130

dkalish@hkm.com

jrittereiser@hkm.com

sfagan@hkm.com

Of Attorneys for Plaintiff Coty Richardson

Trial Attorney: Daniel Kalish

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 24 of 25
 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT - 25 

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 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP

308 SW First Ave., Suite 325 

Portland, Oregon 97204 

(503) 389-1130 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on January 7, 2016, I filed the above-document with the United 

States Federal Court in the above-entitled action, which will, through electronic means, 

provide electronic service through the Court’s Case Management/Electronic Case File 

System to: 

Karen M. Vickers, OSB No. 913810 

Blake H. Fry, OSB No. 100128 

Mersereau Shannon LLP 

One SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600 

Portland, OR 97258-2089 

503-226-6400 ext 206 

503-226-0383 fax 

kvickers@mershanlaw.com 

bfry@merchanlaw.com 

Attorneys for Defendants 

I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

 /s/ Jordan Frazier 

 Jordan Frazier, Legal Assistant 

 HKM Employement Attorneys LLP

Case 6:15-cv-01886-AA Document 21 Filed 01/07/16 Page 25 of 25