Unfair Competition Archives

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Female Former Director of Client Solutions Sues Digilant: Suit Highlights Disability Discrimination, Failure to Provide Accommodation, Failure to Engage in an Interactive Process, Failure to Prevent Discrimination, Retaliation, Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy and Unfair Competition.

EL SEGUNDO, CA (August 20, 2017) — Samira Judeh filed suit this month in San Francisco Superior Court against Digilant, Inc. (Digilant), a marketing technology company that assists in programmatic media buying. The suit accuses Digilant and its employees of disability discrimination, failure to provide accommodation, failure to engage in an interactive process, failure to prevent discrimination, retaliation, wrongful discharge in violation of public policy and unfair competition.

According to the Complaint, soon after learning that Samira would have to be out of the office for doctor’s appointments on a recurring basis, “Chris Cooper, Digilant’s Vice President of Sales at Digilant began harassing Samira. He was demanding, belligerent and made sarcastic comments to Samira.” Samira informed the Chief Operating Officer that Cooper was “harassing her.”. Nothing was done. Soon thereafter, Samira heard Cooper tell Digilant’s Director of Sales Accounts, “I don’t give a shit what she has going on medically. She’ s a bitch!”

In early May, Samira informed Digilant’s Chief Operating Officer him that she had “been diagnosed with a medical condition and that she would need to go to more doctor’s appointments.” Approximately three weeks later, Digilant terminated her, allegedly for the reason that there was a reduction in work force.

The lawsuit seeks damages for lost wages (front and back pay), benefits and career opportunities, special damages, punitive damages, interest and attorneys’ fees and costs. Digilant has since removed the case to the United States Federal District Court, Northern District of California. Click here for a copy of the Complaint.

“We’re eager to commence discovery to determine what actions, if any, Digilant took once it was on notice of Samira’s medical condition to engage in a good faith interactive process with her or to provide an accommodation. We also interested to learn what steps the Company took to prevent discrimination against Samira and whether or not the Company retaliated against Samira.” says Chris Adishian.

About Adishian Law Group, P.C.

Law Group (https://adishianlaw.com) is a California law firm with a statewide practice in the areas of Corporate law, Employment law, Real Estate law and Mediation Services. As of December 2016, the firm has represented corporate and individual clients located across 22 California counties, 13 States outside of California and 10 foreign countries in over 520 legal matters. Adishianlaw.com is one of the oldest continually operating law firm websites on the Internet. The firm serves its clientele via three offices located in the major business hubs of El Segundo, Palo Alto and San Francisco.

For more information about this case, contact Chris Adishian:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Former President Sues Keystone Engineering Company, KE Company Acquisition Corp., Cornerstone Capital Holdings, LLC and Oasis Outsourcing, Inc.: Suit Highlights Retaliation; FEHA Retaliation, Gender Discrimination; Age Discrimination, Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Failure to Prevent Discrimination, Wrongful Termination, Unfair Competition, Breach of Fiduciary Duty of Majority Shareholders and Accounting.

EL SEGUNDO, CA (February 23, 2016)— Jamie Vitalich, an accomplished female aerospace industry executive recently filed suit in Los Angeles Superior Court against Keystone Engineering Company, KE Company Acquisition Corp., Cornerstone Capital Holdings, LLC and Oasis Outsourcing, Inc. The suit accuses defendants of whistleblower retaliation, FEHA retaliation, gender discrimination, age discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, failure to prevent discrimination, wrongful termination, unfair competition, breach of fiduciary duty of majority shareholders, and demands an accounting.

According to the Complaint, the decision makers for the company stated that the Company ”would gain more business with a male President,” and shortly thereafter re-assigned Jamie, marginalized her, demoted her .and promoted a male to President, Ian Ballinger, who then terminated Jamie.

Defendants originally recruited and hired Jamie in 2013. The Complaint goes on to allege that her tenure as President “was marked with achievements , which included: coordinating the implementation of independent IT, HR, quality management and operational finance systems; overseeing the divestiture of the Ontario facility for $7.5 million; and facilitating a company profit that reduced Keystone’s longstanding debt to $1 million.” Prior to her termination Jamie questioned “why Keystone was paying ….a Cornerstone employee…more than 50% of her salary.” The Complaint also alleges that prior to her termination, she questioned “a discrepancy of roughly $300,000 in the statement of the company’s profits between the set of books used to determine the employees’ 2014 profit-sharing and the set of books audited by a third-party auditor.” The Complaint further alleges, that contrary to the stated belief that the Company “would gain more business with a male President”, “with Ballinger at the helm, Keystone’s profits had plunged. Jamie, irrespective of retaining the title of COO, was systematically excluded from meetings vital to the proposal process, including customer proposals and visits, and was, instead, assigned menial, demeaning duties by Bushell and Ballinger.” The Complaint goes on to allege that the “campaign to oust Jamie from Keystone so the ‘face’ of the company would be a man culminated in the pretextual elimination of her COO position and her ….termination…”

“The actions as alleged in the Complaint highlight the destructive impact of illegal discrimination. The case also touches on current themes of discrimination in the world of private equity, venture capital and their portfolio companies (e.g., Tinder lawsuit) and the emerging area of law finding joint employer relationships. We’re eager to commence discovery to determine whether Defendants’ stated rationale was merely a pre-text to cover up a wrongful termination.” says Chris Adishian.

The lawsuit seeks damages for lost wages, benefits and career opportunities, special damages, punitive damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs and an accounting. Click here to read a copy of the Complaint.

About Adishian Law Group, P.C. Adishian Law Group (https://adishianlaw.com) is a California law firm with a statewide practice in the areas of Corporate law, Employment law, Real Estate law and Mediation Services. As of November 2015, the firm has represented corporate and individual clients located across 22 California counties, 13 States outside of California and 9 foreign countries in over 480 legal matters. Adishianlaw.com is one of the oldest continually operating law firm websites on the Internet. The firm serves its clientele via three offices located in the major business hubs of El Segundo, Palo Alto and San Francisco.

For more information about this case, contact Chris Adishian: