A Former Sony IT Security Analyst Seeks Class Action Status in Gender Discrimination Suit

A former Sony IT Security Analyst, Emma Majo, seeks class-action status in a gender discrimination lawsuit.

The Case: Emma Majo v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC

The Court: District Court for the Northern District of California

The Case No.: 3:21-cv-09054

The Plaintiff: Emma Majo

Emma Majo, the plaintiff in the case, sued Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, the maker of Playstation, for gender discrimination and wrongful termination. Majo states she was employed by Sony starting in 2015 and that during her time at the company she saw bias against women regarding promotions and that she stayed in the same position with no promotion for six years (although she frequently put in requests). She also claims that some male supervisors would not speak to women with the door closed, and that if there was a male coworker present, they would only speak to him rather than the female employee.

The Defendant: Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC

Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, the Defendant in the case, is the maker of the popular Playstation gaming console. Their former IT security analyst, Emma Majo, claims the Defendant did not pay women equally to their male coworkers with similar job duties, and titles. She also claims that women were denied promotions and that the company tolerated and even cultivated a workplace environment that discriminated against female workers.

Summary of the Case: Emma Majo v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC

According to Majo’s, she submitted a signed statement advising Sony of the discrimination in 2021. She claims that “soon after” she submitted the signed statement, Sony fired her. Sony claims Majo’s dismissal was due to the elimination of a department, but the plaintiff claims it was unrelated; stating that she was not even a part of the department they are referencing.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

California Federal Jury Awards Former Walmart Pharmacist $27M in Wrongful Termination Suit

A federal jury in California awarded a former Walmart pharmacist $27 million in total damages, agreeing with the plaintiff in the case that the retail giant wrongfully terminated the employee after she voiced concerns about Medicare law violations.

The Case: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

The Court: U.S. District Court, Central District of California

The Case No.: e 8:15-cv-00202-JGB-JCG

The Plaintiff: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

Afrouz Nikmanesh, the plaintiff in the case, is a former pharmacist employed by Walmart Stores, Inc. According to court documents, Nikmanesh was fired after complaining that the company broke Medicare laws.

The Defendant: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

According to former Walmart pharmacist, Afrouz Nikmanesh, Walmart, the Defendant in the case, failed to report required data to the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES program). The database contains information on controlled substance prescriptions dispensed throughout the state of California, and pharmacists are required to file weekly reports with the California Department of Justice.

The Case: Afrouz Nikmanesh v. Wal-mart Stores, Inc.

Nikmanesh alleges she reported the violations to her supervisors between July 2013 and September 2014 and requested they be investigated and corrected to comply with the law. According to the plaintiff, Walmart’s response was to fire her in September of 2014. Nikmanesh claims the firing was solely in retaliation for her reporting and complaining about the company’s failure to comply with state law. According to the plaintiff, Walmart’s failure to report required data to the CURES program was not their only violation. She claims they also violated state law by charging Medicare beneficiaries more than the Medi-Cal reimbursement rate for prescriptions, and failing to offer eligible Medicare patients their discount. A jury of 8 unanimously found that Nikmanesh’s reporting of Walmart overcharging Medicare customers (over 65 and those under 65 who have disabilities) for prescriptions, and not complying with reporting requirements for controlled substance disbursements to the Department of Justice under the CURES system created a substantial motivating factor for Walmart’s decision to terminate her employment in retaliation for her actions. A federal judge awarded the former Walmart pharmacist with $27 million in total damages in agreement that Walmart wrongfully fired her for complaining about Medicare law violations ($40,000 for economic losses, $100,000 for non-economic losses, $60,000 for future non-economic losses, and $27.3 million in punitive damages).

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

A Rosemead, California McDonald’s Employee Claims She was Fired in Retaliation

Ashley Lopez, a former McDonald’s Shift Manager in Rosemead, California, claims she was pressured to violate state child labor laws and fulfill illegal demands from her employer. When she refused, Lopez claimed she was fired in retaliation.

The Case: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

The Case No.: 21STCV31912

The Plaintiff: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

Ashley Lopez worked at a McDonald’s franchise run by M. Pernecky Management Corp. in Rosemead, California. Lopez claims that during her time as an employee she was pressured to violate State child labor laws, and to fulfill other unlawful demands by her employer. She claims that she pushed back against the demands, even reporting the violations to a corporate manager of the franchisee. She was allegedly fired as a result.

The Defendant: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

M. Pernecky Management Corp. runs a McDonald’s franchise in Rosemead, California at which the plaintiff, Ashley Lopez, was employed as a Shift Manager.

The Case: Ashley Lopez vs M. Pernecky Management Corp.

According to the lawsuit, Lopez’s problems with the Rosemead McDonald’s Store Manager, Cesar Reyes, did not begin until after he promoted her to Shift Manager. At the time of her promotion, Lopez was 16 years old. Lopez claims that after her promotion, Reyes regularly stopped complying with California state labor laws limiting the number of hours a minor can work. Lopez claims that Reyes frequently demanded she miss school or stay late on school nights to complete shifts that were illegally long considering the fact that she was a minor. According to the lawsuit, Reyes would insinuate that failure to comply with the illegal demands put Lopez’s job in jeopardy. Lopez also claims she was required to be on-call days she was not scheduled to work, some of which were school days. She also says she was required to work odd hours forcing her to miss even more school. In addition to missing school, Lopez claims she was pushed to skip doctor’s appointments. For instance, when she called out due to an emergency medical procedure, her manager, Reyes, allegedly responded by saying he might have been wrong in making her manager. According to Lopez, she brought the issue up with Operations Supervisor Ruben Duran, Reyes’ supervisor, but no action was taken. After she made the complaints, Lopez claims Reyes fired her. Lopez further claims that when she attempted to appeal the termination to Duran, he was hostile and ultimately sided with Reyes on the matter.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Small California Christian Nursing School Faces Allegations of Retaliation and Wrongful Termination in Court

Two former professors filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against a small, Christian California Nursing School alleging retaliation, and wrongful termination.

The Case: Anita Bralock v. American University of Health Sciences Inc.

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

The Case No.: BC614955

The Plaintiff: Bralock v. American University

The plaintiffs in the case, Anita Bralock and Brandon Fryman, are two former professors at American University. The professors filed a wrongful termination lawsuit claiming they were fired from their jobs at the university for investigating students’ claims of sexual harassment against the school’s founder, ​​Pastor Gregory Johnson. The plaintiffs claim that Johnson and the American University of Health Sciences retaliated against them after they (along with a 3rd faculty member) launched investigations into multiple students’ complaints alleging sexually inappropriate behavior from the school’s founder, Johnson.

The Defendant: Bralock v. American University

American University, a small (approx. 300 students), Christian nursing school founded in California in 1993, and its founder, Johnson, deny the allegations and maintain that the plaintiffs were fired from their positions at the school because they had plans to start a competing school and when American University attempted to investigate their activities regarding the matter, the two would not cooperate.

More About the Case: Bralock v. American University

The wrongful termination suit between two former professors and a small California Christian nursing school proceeded to jury trial. A California state court jury heard opening statements in the case. Since the school receives federal funding, it is required to adhere to Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in educational settings. The plaintiffs’ counsel also noted that the founder, Johnson, filled an unusually significant number of administrative roles for American University, including the Title IX Coordinator, which made it awkward for students who wished to raise concerns or make allegations related to Johnson’s own behavior.

Incidents Leading to the Wrongful Termination: Bralock v. American University

When nursing students brought complaints of unwanted touching or inappropriate comments to Fryman, he turned to Bralock, as the dean of the nursing school, and a third faculty member. Together, the three faculty members met with the nursing student who made the original complaint at an off-campus location to discuss the claims. According to the plaintiffs, when Johnson learned of the situation, the investigations were taken over by his attorney and according to allegations, they were quickly buried. Not long after, Fryman’s salary was cut by 50%. Then both Fryman and Bralock were fired after an investigation that was allegedly related to their involvement in a business plan to start a competing school. The plaintiffs claim this was a cover for the unlawful retaliation in connection to the Title IX investigation. The University’s counsel claims that Fryman and Bralock were actively involved in plans to start a competing school, and that the school was within their rights to fire employees involved in plans that supported a competitor. The defendant’s counsel also accused the plaintiffs of creating a false narrative because there was nothing else they could legally do for getting caught attempting to work against their current employer.

If you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, or you have questions about employment law violations, get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP today. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Former Partner Alleges Wrongful Termination After Reporting Unlawful Activity

A former Dentons partner claims he was wrongfully terminated from his job after he reported that the firm allegedly forged a document in an attempt to transfer millions in dollars of client funds.

The Case: Zhang v. Dentons U.S. LLP

The Court: California Central District Court

The Case No.: 2:21-cv-04682

The Plaintiff: Zhang vs. Dentons

Jinshu John Zhang, a corporate attorney, was a Dentons partner in the international legal giant’s Los Angeles office. Zhang alleges that he was wrongfully terminated from his position. According to the suit, Zhang reported that the firm forged a document attempting to transfer millions of dollars from a Chinese client. Zhang also alleges bias based on Chinese race or his national origin. The dispute appears to have started over determining Zhang’s share of a “large award of attorneys’ fees” related to a multi-million dollar settlement for a foreign arbitration Zhang handled for a client based in the People’s Republic of China.

The Defendant: Zhang vs. Dentons

The defendant in the case, Dentons, argues that Zhang was fired for cause. The firm alleges that they terminated Zhang for cause on May 5 and immediately entered into arbitration with the plaintiff to attempt to collect the contingency fee award, but Zhang initiated a state court lawsuit against the firm during the dispute resolution process, which violated his partnership agreement with the firm. According to court documents, Zhang continued to participate in arbitration proceedings, but abruptly withdrew from arbitration when an adverse ruling was issued on May 26, 2021. Dentons claims Zhang breached his employment contract by attempting to directly negotiate his share of the award with the client. However, Zhang claims Dentons committed fraud by directing its attorneys to forge the client’s signature to initiate a funds transfer.

Details About the Case: Zhang vs. Dentons

Dentons brought arbitration proceedings against Zhang followed by Zhang suing in California state court alleging Chinese-based employment bias. Dentons removed the state case to federal court alleging jurisdiction based on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the Federal Arbitration Act. However, on June 11th Judge Klausner concluded that the case belongs in state court because the firm failed to show jurisdiction was proper under the New York Convention and the FAA does not separately confer jurisdiction to federal court. While the convention does govern international arbitration agreements, the agreement at issue in the case is actually the employment agreement (and its arbitration clause) between Dentons and Zhang, not the arbitration agreement the client sued under regarding the foreign matter (which was previously settled). Since the employment agreement is between two US citizens, the matter does not fall under federal jurisdiction.

If you have questions about California employment law or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Trio of Lawyers Claim Firm Fired Employees Based on Pro-Trump Opinions

A trio of attorneys formerly with Kain & Scott PA allege their Minnesota bankruptcy firm of firing co-workers for their public support of President Donald Trump, and the police force online. The attorneys making the allegations claim that after they pointed out the disparity, they were also fired for speaking up.

Details of the Case: William P. Kain et al. v. LifeBack Law Firm PA et al.

Court: Minnesota District Court for Stearns County

Case No.: 73-CV-21-3830

The Plaintiffs in the Case: William P. Kain et al. v. LifeBack Law Firm PA et al.

William Kain (name parner), and partners Margaret Henehan and Kelsey Quarberg claim that Kain & Scott President Wesley W. Scott forced them out of the firm after they brought up that his behavior regarding a number of terminations was inappropriate. The plaintiffs allege that Scott instructed the firm operations manager to fire two firm employees citing that they were “racist” because they shared pro-Trump and pro-police social media posts. The plaintiffs confronted Scott and told him they were worried that the previously mentioned conduct was a violation of state law prohibiting economic reprisals or loss of employment due to political affiliation or activity. They also claim they advised him the situation was not good for employee morale and that it put the entire firm at risk. The plaintiffs allege wrongful termination, whistleblower law violations, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious invasion of privacy, and defamation. They seek unspecified damages, including lost wages and benefits, as well as a court order to force Scott or the firm in general to purchase their shares at a previously agreed upon value.

The Defendant in the Case: William P. Kain et al. v. LifeBack Law Firm PA et al.

The trio of attorneys claim that initially Scott apologized for her behavior and officially resigned, requesting that Kain, Henehan, and Quarberg buy him out. However, the next day, Scott withdrew his resignation, and instead terminated the three attorneys who brought the complaint. Scott told other firm staff that the plaintiffs were fired for insubordination, which the plaintiffs claim is not true.

Since the Suit was Filed: William P. Kain et al. v. LifeBack Law Firm PA et al.

Since the suit was filed, the firm continues to use Kain’s name, although it did officially change the name of the firm to LifeBack Law Firm (late May 2021). According to the plaintiffs, Kain’s name is still used on the firm’s website, address, and property signage. The three attorneys who were fired from the firm state that they are shareholders owning a combined 50% of issued and outstanding shares of the firm’s common stock, but that the firm is being difficult in negotiating to buy out their shares. The plaintiffs also claim that Scott cut off their access to firm telephones, email, computer systems, and physical offices (the locks were changed). Scott even called the police requesting they remove Quarberg from the St. Cloud office. He claimed Quarberg was trespassing and physically threatened him.

If you have questions about California labor law violations or wrongful termination, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

California Chef Claims Wrongful Termination After Injury

A posh California hotel and marina is facing claims of wrongful termination from a former executive chef. The former executive chef, Eric Sauber, filed a suit against Westgroup Portofino LLC and The Portofino Hotel & Marina of Redondo Beach in Los Angeles County claiming the company fired him claiming business was slow due to the Covid-19 pandemic, but that they quickly hired another person without Sauber’s medical disabilities to fill his executive chef position at the resort and marina.

All the Details of the Case: Eric Sauber v. Westgroup Portofino LLC et al

Case No.: 21STCV08200

Court: Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles

Plaintiff, Former Head Chef, Alleges California Hotel Wrongly Fired Him Over Injury

Eric Sauber, former executive chef for a high-end California hotel and marina, filed his complaint in the Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles. The lawsuit includes allegations that the resort wrongfully terminated him after he sustained a work-related injury and took legally protected medical leave. Soon after Sauber provided his work-related restrictions to the company, the company allegedly terminated him claiming his position (executive chef) was being eliminated due to inadequate business. According to the complaint, this occurred while the plaintiff was on protected medical leave.

The Plaintiff’s History with the Company:

According to the complaint, Sauber took the job at Portofino in 2019. He worked at the beachside hotel’s restaurant through February 2020. In February of 2020, Sauber sustained a work injury and an orthopedic surgeon placed him on sedentary work restrictions for about a month. After learning of the restrictions, the resort’s human resources director contacted Sauber and let him know he was terminated from his position, and advised him that if business improved he would be reinstated. Contrary to HR’s claims, Sauber soon learned that another employee at the resort was promoted to Sauber’s former position as top chef. The new executive chef’s name was even promoted publicly on the company’s website - advertising a “chef’s table” overseen by chef Hung Quan at BaleenKitchen in the Portofino hotel.

The Basics of the Case: Eric Sauber v. Westgroup Portofino LLC et al

Sauber sustained a slip-and-fall injury in the bathroom while at work. The injuries were serious enough to require arthroscopic knee surgery. After surgery, Sauber took protected medical leave in order to fulfill restrictions prescribed by a doctor. While he was on medical leave, the company told him they were forced to lay him off due to the negative effect of Covid-19 on the hotel’s business. Another hotel employee was quickly given Sauber’s former title and position at the hotel’s restaurant, and was even advertised as the head chef in online advertisements for the restaurant. Sauber’s counsel attempted to settle the matter out of court, but negotiations failed, and Sauber filed suit against Portofino under California's Private Attorneys General Act and the state's Fair Employment and Housing Act. Sauber cites various violations including: disability discrimination, failure to accommodate his disabilities, retaliation and wrongful termination.

If you need to discuss California labor law violations in the workplace or if you need to file a California wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.