June 1, 2021 - FIRST DAY OF PRIDE MONTH - As reported by DEADLINE:
The Walt Disney Company may be gearing up for its traditional celebration of Pride month, but today a long-time executive has hit the House of Mouse with a lawsuit of discrimination based on sexual orientation.
“Plaintiff has direct and repeated complaints to HR about the discrimination he has endured while employed by Defendants and, concomitantly, the related failures to promote him and to pay him at the same level as other department heads,” says the complaint filed in LA Superior Court on the first day of LGBTQ+ Pride month by attorneys for Joel Hopkins.
“After his sexual orientation became known to his superiors and after being discriminated against and put on a dead-end career track and repeatedly denied promotions with no remedy or relief from HR, Plaintiff is informed and believes that yet again, in or around April 2021, several promotions occurred, but Plaintiff once again was not promoted,” continues the 10-page filing for sexual orientation discrimination and failure to prevent discrimination in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. “Plaintiff is informed and believes that these promotions occurred despite representations that Disney was hurting financially and not promoting.”
CLICK THIS LINK to read the Deadline article:
Michael Zarocostas represented Tania Zarak, a former high-level Netflix manager who sued the streaming juggernaut for allegedly firing her for being pregnant and planning to go on maternity leave.
Zarak, 39, a Mexican-born film producer and married mother-of-two toddlers, with a third child on the way, filed a complaint against her former employer claiming wrongful termination, discrimination, and harassment.
According to Zarak's 35-page lawsuit first published by Deadline.com, she was hired as a manager in the International Originals division at Netflix in July 2018 and was fired within five months, just weeks after announcing her pregnancy.
For more information about the case, please read this Daily Mail article or this Variety article.
If you believe you have been wrongfully terminated, please contact us to evaluate your case and obtain advice.
In 2010 in New Mexico, a plaintiff named Arthur Firstenburg filed a $1.43 million lawsuit against his neighbor, Raphaela Monribot, claiming that her use of electronic devices and WiFi had caused him harm. Just like the character Chuck McGill (Saul's brother) in the AMC hit TV show "Better Call Saul," Firstenburg claimed that he suffered from "electromagnetic hypersensitivity" and that Monribot's use of electronics caused him years of "chronic pain."
As described in more detail in a New York Times article, the trial court denied Firstenburg's request for a preliminary injunction preventing his neighbor from using her electronic devices, but the court let the case proceed on the merits. Although there was little, if any, evidence that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a real illness, the court allowed both sides to conduct a battle of experts. Ultimately, after the defense attorneys expended significant time and money (including $200,000 in fees), the court finally dismissed Firstenburg's case on summary judgment.
Incredibly, Firstenburg appealed, but this time without counsel to represent him. Fortunately, his pro se appeal was denied by New Mexico's Court of Appeals.
The lesson to be learned here is that not every perceived slight is actionable at law, and these kinds of meritless cases only serve to besmirch the practice of law by honorable attorneys. If you think you have a case, including a nuisance claim or any other action against a neighbor, contact a good lawyer first before wasting your time and creating unnecessary conflict. In other words, don't call Saul Goodman.