City of Oakland employee harassed by supervisor. $2.62M. Alameda County.
Summary
Twelve-year employee says supervisor sexually harassed her for five years, but the City took no action after its investigation and retaliated against plaintiff.
The Case
- Case Name: Patricia Toscano v. City of Oakland, et al.
- Court and Case Number: Alameda County Superior Court / RG21094864
- Date of Verdict or Judgment: Monday, May 06, 2024
- Date Action was Filed: Tuesday, March 23, 2021
- Type of Case: Discrimination, Sexual, Employment, Sexual Harassment
- Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Rebekah Evenson
-
Plaintiffs: Patricia Toscano, 52
-
Defendants: City of Oakland
- Type of Result: Jury Verdict
The Result
- Gross Verdict or Award: $2,623,153.82
-
Economic Damages:
$122,553.82
-
Non-Economic Damages:
$2,500,000
- Trial or Arbitration Time: 7 days
- Jury Deliberation Time: 7 hours
The Attorneys
-
Attorney for the Plaintiff:
Vinick Hyams LLP by Sharon R. Vinick and Jean K. Hyams, Oakland.
Law Offices of Wendy Musell PC by Katherine L. Smith, Oakland.
-
Attorney for the Defendant:
LTL Attorneys by David Ammons and Patice Gore, Los Angeles.
The Experts
-
Plaintiff’s Medical Expert(s):
Jessica Rowe, PsyD, psychology.
-
Defendant's Medical Expert(s):
Mark Strassberg, M.D., psychiatry.
-
Plaintiff's Technical Expert(s):
Monica Ip, economics.
Facts and Background
-
Facts and Background:
Plaintiff worked for the City of Oakland as an administrative assistant in one of the city's senior centers. Plaintiff worked for the city for 12 years.
-
Plaintiff's Contentions:
Plaintiff contended that she was sexually harassed by a supervisor, beginning in 2016. That Plaintiff worked for the city for 12 years and she was harassed for five years. Plaintiff repeatedly reported the harassment to her supervisor, her supervisor's supervisor, and numerous others including the head of Human Relations for the City of Oakland.
An internal investigation confirmed some, but not all, of the allegations made by plaintiff, but no action was taken to prevent further harassment. As a result, the sexual harassment continued. Furthermore, plaintiff was subjected to acts of retaliation, such as being denied training opportunities, and being transferred to a less desirable worksite. Eventually, the emotional distress caused by the sexual harassment, the retaliation, and the City's failure to take all reasonable steps to end the harassment/retaliation, resulted in plaintiff going on an extended medical leave.
For reasons unrelated to the lawsuit, plaintiff did not return to work following her medical leave.
-
Defendant's Contentions:
Defendant contended that the plaintiff was not subjected to sexual harassment or retaliation. Defendant further contended that it conducted a prompt and effective investigation.
Injuries and Other Damages
-
Plaintiff claimed that she experienced severe emotional distress due to the sexual harassment, the retaliation, and the City's failure to take prompt, effective remedial actions.