Case No. BC318102
Attorney
K. Arianne Jordan
First Amended Complaint For Damages
1. Sexual harassment
2. Retaliation
This is a classic case of quid pro quo sexual harassment in which
Scott Taylor, the President of several adult entertainment companies,
pursued and became obsessed with a salacious sexual relationship with
his 18 year old employee, Deena DeRosa. Despite the fact that Ms.
DeRosa was him employee and more than 20 years his junior, Mr. Taylor
used his power and position as President of the Defendant Companies
to entice her into a lurid sexual relationship in which Mr. Taylor
demanded that Ms. DeRosa make herself available for sexual trysts
at all times convenient for him, notwithstanding the effect that this
would have on Ms. DeRosa's ability to perform her job duties. When
the sexual relationship between Ms. DeRosa and Mr. Taylor ended, the
Defendants retaliated against her by demoting her from Vice President
of Sales to data processing assistant, a position that paid substantially
less, with the goal of forcing her to resign from the Defendant's
employ. In addition to this treatment, Ms. DeRosa was forced to work
in an environment pervaded by sexual hostility towards women including...offensive
behavior and comments. The unfair and illegal treatment that Ms. DeRosa
was subjected to by the Defendants has caused her substantial psychological
and economic damages.
[Deena DeRosa] began her employment on September 25, 2000.
11. Ms. DeRosa was initially employed as an assistant to Leilani
Whitney, the managing director of the companies. Thereafter, due to
her exemplary performance, she was promoted to Vice President of Sales
in or about March 2001.
12. Beginning in or about January 2001, Defendant Taylor initiated
and pursued an obsessive intimate relationship with Ms. DeRosa. The
relationship lasted approximately two years. Defendant Taylor's affair
with Ms. DeRosa included unannounced visits to her apartment very
late at night during the work week. Defendant Taylor initited sexual
liasons in his office before work, during work hours, and on weekends.
Defendant Taylor took Ms. DeRosa to numerous locations to have sex
including, but not limited to, a Hyatt hotel at a "Park-n-Ride"
location in Porter Ranch and in a parking lot at Chatsworth Park.
Defendant Taylor bought Ms. DeRosa expensive jewelry and other gifts
and contributed monthly payments for her apartment. Defendant Taylor
communicated with Ms. DeRosa during the work day by instant messaging
her and by calling her into his office whenever he desired. These
communications and visits to Defendant Taylor's office decreased Ms.
DeRosa's ability to generate telephone sales, which was her primary
function as Vice President of Sales.
13. Defendant Taylor spied on Ms. DeRosa in order to know what she
was doing at all times when he was not with her. He demanded that
employees of Defendant Companies report to him regarding their knowledge
of Ms. DeRosa's personal life. As a result of Defendant Taylor's actions,
Ms. DeRosa was worried and concerned that if she did not participate
in the relationship, that her job as well as that of her mother (who
also worked for the Defendant), would be placed jeopardy.
14. The intimate relationship between Defendant Taylor and Ms. DeRosa
ended in or about March or April 2003. Defendant Taylor's wife discovered
their relationship and demnaded that Defendant Taylor end it. Defendant
Taylor's wife also demanded that he fire Ms. DeRosa as soon as possible.
15. In or about April 2003, Ms. DeRosa was demoted...and her salary
was reduced from $20 per hour to $12...
16. [I]n April 2004, Ms. DeRosa filed her administrative complaints
with the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing (DFEH).
Ms. DeRosa was placed on paid administrative leave.
17. Ms. DeRosa's mother, Penny DeRosa, was terminated from her position
at Defendant companies in or about late March or April 2004. Ms. DeRosa
is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the termination
of her mother's employment was a further act of retaliation against
her for her complaints of sexual harassment and for her termination
of her sexual relationship with Defendant Taylor.
18. Ms. DeRosa is informed and believes and thereon alleges that
Defendant Companies and Does 1 through 25 knew or reasonably should
have known that Defendant Taylor was sexually harassing, discriminating,
and retaliating against her and that, as a direct and proximate result
of those violations, she would suffer injuries as alleged herein.
Moreoever, Defendant Companies and Does 1 through 25 created and fostered
a sexually hostile work environment wherein offensive and derogatory
statements and conduct were directed towards women.
21.
C. Defendant Taylor's expectation that Plaintiff engage in sexual
relations with him in return for preferential treatment in the workplace.
D. Defendant Taylor's unwelcome visits to Plaintiff's apartment very
late on week nights and insistence that Plaintiff make herself available
to him for sexual relations very early in the morning before work.
F. Defendant Taylor's inappropriate sexual comments to Plaintiff
including comments about giving her a "birthday spanking."
H. Defendants' acts of permitting male employees to watch sexually
explicit films in the workplace, unrelated to their work duties, and
allowing those employees to openly make comments in the workplace
about the "sluts" and "skanky hos" in the films.
I. Defendants' acts of permitting male employees to write sexually
offensive and derogatory comments about women on posters bearing their
likeness that were posted on walls in the workplace.
48. Plaintiff has been caused to suffer and continues to suffer severe
emotional and mental distress, anguish, humiliation, embarrassment,
shock, discomfort, and anxiety. The exact nature and extent of said
injuries is presently unknown to Plaintiff, who will seek leave of
Court to assert the same when they are ascertained. Plaintiff does
not know at this time the exact duration or permance of said injuries
but is informed and believe, and thereon alleges, that some of the
injuries are reasonably certain to be permanent in nature.
I don't think any porn company owner in the past decade has had more
porn women than New Sensations owner Scott Taylor, who is married with
kids. A handsome charismatic guy with a ton of money, Scott has gone
through porn stars by the bushel as well as some of his attractive female
employees.
Scott had a long-running affair with one employee, Deena DeRosa, who
was only 18 when it began (she's 20 years younger than Scott). It lasted
two years. Soon after it broke up, he fired her and then her mom Penny.
Deena then sued him for sexual discrimination in the Spring of 2004.
Other porn company owners who have had more than their share -- Gabor
Esterhazy of Heat Wave (particularly likes black women, has probably
had more than 100 porn girls), John Bowen, and, back in the day, Steve
Hirsch.