Wrongful termination after wage-and-hour violations and sexual harassment. $583K. Orange County.


Loan processor says she was cheated on her pay and harassed by a supervisor.

The Case

  • Case Name: Maria Inga v. Assent Mortgage, LLC, et al.
  • Court and Case Number: Orange County Superior Court / 30-2020-01135718
  • Date of Verdict or Judgment: Tuesday, August 09, 2022
  • Date Action was Filed: Monday, March 02, 2020
  • Type of Case: Employment, Sexual Harassment, Wrongful Termination
  • Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Donald F. Gaffney
  • Plaintiffs:
    Maria Inga
  • Defendants:
    Assent Mortgage, LLC
    Mahyar Kazemi a/k/a Matt Kazemi
  • Type of Result: Jury Verdict

The Result

  • Gross Verdict or Award: $583,012.49
  • Trial or Arbitration Time: 4 weeks
  • Jury Deliberation Time: 2 days

The Attorneys

  • Attorney for the Plaintiff:

    Yash Law Group by Yashdeep Singh, Brea.

  • Attorney for the Defendant:

    Carlson & Messer LLP by Stephen A. Watkins, Martin Schannong and David J. Kaminski, Los Angeles.

Facts and Background

  • Facts and Background:

    Plaintiff worked for defendant company May 16, 2017 through March 13, 2018 as a loan processor. She was 22 years old when she started the job.

    While plaintiff worked for defendants, they failed to pay plaintiff all of her wages and subjected her to other wage-and-hour violations.

    Plaintiff, who is a woman, was also subjected to sexual harassment and discrimination.

  • Plaintiff's Contentions:

    That defendants failed to pay to plaintiff unpaid regular wages, unpaid overtime wages, unpaid meal period premiums, waiting time penalties under Labor Code section 203, and unreimbursed business expenses.

    That plaintiff witnessed and was the target of unwelcome, lewd, and insulting conduct and comments. For example, a supervisor made sexual advances to plaintiff, stalked plaintiff outside of work, and even threatened her job if she did not accept his advances. The despicable treatment of plaintiff became so intolerable that she was forced to file a restraining order against the harassing supervisor. 

    Defendants failed to accommodate plaintiff to obtain the restraining order, which was necessary to protect plaintiff. Additionally, another male manager made repeated offensive comments that were sexual in nature about plaintiff, including crude (and false) statements about having sexual intercourse with plaintiff and about her physical appearance.  

  • Defendant's Contentions:

    Defendants argued that they terminated plaintiff for legitimate reasons, such as attendance issues and the harasser obtaining a restraining order against plaintiff. 

Demands and Offers

  • Plaintiff §998 Demand: $100K plus fees and costs.