A California appellate court has upheld a lower court's decision to deny arbitration in a high-profile case involving allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation. The complaint, filed by John Doe against Indus Investments, Inc., Tehmina Adaya, and Royal Lush, LLC on February 27, 2023, in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, accuses the defendants of severe misconduct in the workplace.
John Doe initiated legal action after being terminated from his position as a personal assistant on June 3, 2022. He alleges that during his employment starting in March 2017, he was subjected to unwanted sexual advances and inappropriate behavior by Adaya. According to Doe's complaint, "After 2019, the sexual harassment worsened," culminating in an incident where Adaya allegedly grabbed his genitalia in May 2022. These allegations form part of an extensive list of grievances including assault, gender violence, wrongful termination, and multiple wage-related violations.
The defendants initially sought to compel arbitration based on an agreement signed by Doe in February 2018. However, the trial court denied this petition for claims related to sexual harassment citing the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021. This federal law prohibits mandatory arbitration for such claims if they arise or accrue after its enactment date of March 3, 2022. Despite arguments from the defense that most incidents occurred before this date and that Doe had waived his right to object by participating in arbitration proceedings initiated by Indus and Adaya on June 27, 2022, the court ruled otherwise.
Doe's attorney Emanuel S. Shirazi argued that "the pattern of unlawful behavior continued beyond March 3, 2022," supported by Doe’s declaration detailing ongoing harassment through May 2022. The trial court accepted these assertions despite them not being explicitly stated in the initial complaint.
The appellate court affirmed this decision on July 18, 2028. It concluded that Doe did not waive his rights under federal law by participating in arbitration concerning other claims initiated by the defendants. The court also rejected splitting the causes of action between pre- and post-March 3 incidents for separate adjudication.
This ruling highlights significant legal protections against forced arbitration for victims of sexual harassment and underscores employers' obligations under evolving federal statutes.
Representing John Doe is Emanuel S. Shirazi from Shirazi Law Firm while Timothy D. McGonigle along with Scott D. Bertzyk from Greenberg Traurig represent Indus Investments and other defendants. The case was presided over by Judge Anne Richardson under Case ID B331252.