Plaintiffs, Stacy Galonsky and Mahri Feldman by way of Complaint against the Defendants, Montel B. Williams, individually; OMW Productions, Inc.; Montel Williams, Inc.; Letnom Productions, Inc. Viacom, Inc.; and Paramount Television Pictures hereby say:
FIRST COUNT
(Sexual Harassment-Hostile Environment Violation of New Jersey Law Against Discrimination)
1. Plaintiff, Stacy Galonsky, an individual, at all times relevant to this Complaint resided in the City of Jersey, County of Hudson and State of New Jersey and was employed by Defendant OMW Productions; Viacom, Inc.; and Paramount Domestic Television Group as an Associate Producer promoted to Senior Associate Producer and later to full Producer of the Montel Williams talk show between September 16, 1994 and February 15, 1996.
2. Plaintiff, Mahri Feldman, an individual at all times relevant to this Complaint resided in the Borough of Cliffside Park, County of Bergen and State of New Jersey and was employed by Defendants OMW Productions, Inc.; Montel Williams, Individually; Montel Williams, Inc.; Letnom Productions, Inc.; Viacom Inc.; and Paramount Domestic Television Group as a receptionist promoted to Executive Assistant of Montel Williams and Mary Duffy, co-executive producers of the Montel Williams talk show between February 10, 1995 and April 17, 1996.
3. Defendant, OMW Productions, Inc. ("OMW"), is, upon information and belief, a New York Corporation, and licensed to do business and/or doing business at 356 West 57th Street, Suite 101, New York, New York and the State of New Jersey.
4. Defendant, Montel Williams, an individual, ("Williams"), at all times relevant to this complaint resided in the State of Connecticut. Defendant Williams possesses a substantial ownership interest in OMW and is employed as Co-executive Producer and Talk Show Host by the same, exercising control and management of OMW's business operations.
5. Defendant, Viacom, Inc; ("Viacom"), is, upon information and belief, either a New York or Delaware Corporation, and licensed to do business and/is doing business.in all counties in the State of New York and New Jersey having its principal place of business at 1515 Broadway New York, New York 10036. Defendant Viacom possesses a substantial ownership interest in OMW, exercising control and management of OMW's business operations through its Paramount Domestic Television Group.
6. Defendant, Paramount Domestic Television Group ("Paramount") is a part of, division and/or wholly owned subsidiary of Viacom, having its principal place of business at 5555 Melrose Avenue, Dietrich Bldg. Room 210, Hollywood, California 90038 and doing business in all counties within the State of New York and New Jersey.
7. Defendant, Montel William, Inc., ("MWI") is upon information and belief either a New York or Delaware corporation, is wholly owned and controlled by Williams, having its principal place of business at 331 West 57th Street, #233 New York, New York 10019 and licensed to do and/or doing business in the State of New Jersey.
8. Defendant, Letnom Productions, Inc. ("Letnom") is, upon information and belief either a New York or Delaware Corporation licensed to do business and/or doing business in the States of New York and New Jersey, which is wholly owned and/or controlled by Williams having its principal place of business at 331 West 57th Street, Suite #233, New York, New York 10019.
9. At all times relevant to this Complaint, during the period Plaintiffs were employed by Defendant they worked under the direct supervision of Defendant, Williams and Mary Duffy, Co-Executive Producer of OMW.
10. At all times relevant herein, the Montel Williams Talk Show was produced by and under the direction, control and supervision of OMW in association with Viacom Inc., and Paramount Domestic Television Group.
11. Defendants wrongful conduct as alleged herein below pertaining to Plaintiffs occurred in-both the States of New Jersey and New York, while Plaintiff were performing their respective job responsibilities in both States.
12. During the period that Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants OMW as above, Defendant Williams created a hostile and abusive environment within which Plaintiffs were compelled to work with Defendant Williams regularly and systematically, severely and pervasively engaging in sexually offensive conduct and remarks and unwanted physical touching of Plaintiffs and other employees including, but not limited to the following:
(a) Employees, including Plaintiffs, were required to attend regular meetings in either Defendant Williams dressing room at Defendant OMW's New York City studio location or trailer at the Bayonne, New Jersey filming location for "Mat Waters". During these meetings, in the present of Plaintiff and other employees, Defendant Williams would either undress down to, or be undressed in his underwear (briefs).
(b) Defendant, Williams' subjected OMW employees, including Plaintiffs, to sexually offensive and demeaning verbal abuse, where he commonly referred to female employees and guests as "hoes/whores", "bitches" and "cunts".
(c) Defendant, Williams would regularly engage in uninvited kissing, touching, and hugging of female employees, including Plaintiffs.
(d) Defendant Williams, after having awakened from sleep on a couch by Ms. Feldman, asked, "Did I make an advance at you?" Ms. Feldman replied "No!" Mr. Williams continued, "Did I kiss you?" Ms. Feldman replied "No!" Mr. Williams then stated, "I just had a very strange dream."
(e) On several occasions, Defendant Williams grabbed and smacked the rear end/buttocks of employees, including Plaintiff Feldman.
(f) Defendant Williams selected and directed Plaintiff Feldman and Brooke Sullivan to star in the roles of prostitutes in an Anti-Drug Public Service Announcement (PSA). Defendant Williams informed Plaintiff Feldman she was selected for the role because she is a "natural hoe/whore".
(g) Plaintiff, Feldman was given a note from co-employee, Brooke Sullivan intended for Defendant Williams stating "Montel, if you need a 'fluffer' (a woman experienced at oral sex), don't forget to call".
(h) Defendant Williams, while in the presence of several employees, said to Plaintiff Feldman, "I know you are still doing it [intercourse with him (ex-fiance)]".
(i) Defendant Williams informed Ms. Galonsky that women employees should have the option of taking time off when having their periods (menstruating).
(j) Defendant Williams repeatedly stated how his two (2) year old boy has high levels of testosterone.
(k) Defendant Williams suggested female employees who get pregnant should quit work and stay home with their children.
(l) Women employees have. commonly referred to the work atmosphere and environment created and controlled by Defendant Williams as a "Battered women's shelter, where all the female employees are battered women"
(m) Defendant Williams has made romantic and sexual advances to and dated employees and guests, including but not limited to Grace Williams (now Defendant, Williams wife and former guest).
(n) Defendant, Williams, Mary Duffy and other agents, employees and/or servants of Defendants manipulated/treated and abused women guests in sexually offensive and demeaning ways, including but not limited to presenting them in a light and/or manner demeaning to women.
13. Plaintiffs complained to Defendant Williams and OMW that such conduct and sexual harassment as above, was unwelcome and uninvited, which continued unabated.
14. Defendants did not have any effective anti-sexual harassment policy in place during the period the Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants.
15. Defendants knew or should have known about the sexually hostile and abusive environment-in which Plaintiff was compelled to work by virtual of the actions and conduct of Defendant Williams.
16. Plaintiffs' performance while employed by Defendants was more than satisfactory, and met all of such Defendants' reasonable expectations.
17. But for Plaintiffs objection to Defendants', wrongful conduct and practices and sexual hostility, Plaintiffs, as is the fact, would not have been discharged by Defendants.
18. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants sexual harassment and loss of Plaintiffs employment with Defendants, Plaintiffs have suffered, and will continue to experience, substantial loss of income and benefits, expenses related to professional counseling, enormous emotional distress, trauma, psychological and/or psychiatric damages, pain and suffering, as well as humiliation, loss of respect and esteem, and adverse affects upon their daily personal, social and business life.
19. Defendants, Williams, MWI, OMW, Letnom, Viacom and Paramount aided and abetted Defendant OMW and/are vicariously liable for the unlawful actions and conduct of Williams as an agent, servant and/or employee of Defendants OMW, MWI, Viacom, Paramount and Letnom which is violative of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, of Defendants, Williams under the doctrine of respondent superior.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, for compensatory and punitive damage, equitable relief, counsel fees, pre and post judgment interest, court costs and any other relief the Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances.
SECOND COUNT
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
1. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations set in the First Count as if set forth herein verbatim
2. All Defendants actions and conduct, as described herein, constitutes the tort of intentional infliction of mental distress.
WHEREFORE Plaintiff seeks judgment against all Defendants for compensatory and punitive damages, counsel fees, pre and post judgment interest, court costs and fees and such other relief as the Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances.
THIRD COUNT
(Assault)
1 Plaintiffs repeat and reallege the allegations set forth in Counts One though Two as if set forth herein verbatim.
2. Defendants conduct as described herein above, constitutes the tort of assault.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment against defendants for compensatory and punitive damages, counsel fees, pre and post judgment interest, court costs and fees and such other relief as the Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances.
FOURTH COUNT
(Tortious Interference of Employment Relationship)
1. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every paragraph of each and every Count herein as if set forth herein verbatim.
2. Defendants Williams, OMW, Letnom, MWI, Viacom and Paramount in engaging in the actions and conduct described herein, tortiously interfered with Plaintiffs' employment relationship with the other named Defendants herein.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment against the aforesaid Defendants for compensatory and punitive damages, counsel fees, pre and post judgment interest, court costs and fees and such other relief as the Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances.
FIFTH COUNT
(Breach of Galonsky's Contract)
1. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every paragraph of each and every Count herein as if set forth herein verbatim.
2. On or about May 28, 1995, Plaintiff Galonsky and Defendant OMW entered into a written contract, copy of which is attached hereto, containing renewable options exercisable by OMW, the most recent renewal of an option being for the 1995-1996 guaranteed period ending July 1, 1996 at $1,750.00 per week.
3. Defendant OMW breached its obligation to pay Plaintiff guaranteed payments of $1,750.00 per week for nineteen (19) weeks, totalling $32,250.00.
4. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant, OMW's breach as aforesaid the Plaintiff has and will continue to suffer substantial damages.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Galonsky demands judgment against Defendant OMW on this Count for:
a. Damages;
b. Consequential and incidental injuries;
c. Attorney's fees;
d. Interest;
e. Costs of suit;
f. Punitive damages;
g. For such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
SIXTH COUNT
(Breach of Feldman Contract)
1. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every paragraph of each, and every Count herein as if set forth herein verbatim.
2. On or about June 1, 1995, Plaintiff Feldman and Defendant OMW entered into an oral agreement whereby Plaintiff was promised $800.00 per week for one (1) year. OMW terminated Plaintiff's contract by terminating her on April 17, 1996.
3. Defendant OMW breached its obligation to pay Plaintiff guaranteed payments of $800.00 per week for 6.5 weeks, totalling $5,200.00.
4. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant, OMW's breach as aforesaid the Plaintiff has and will continue to suffer substantial damages.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Feldman demands judgment against Defendant OMW on this Count for:
a. Damages;
b. Consequential and incidental injuries;
c. Attorney's fees;
d. Interest;
e. Costs of suit;
f. Punitive damages;
g. For such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
SEVENTH COUNT
1. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every paragraph of each and every Count herein as if set forth at length herein.
2. On or about June 13 and 14, 1996, Defendant, Williams acting as agent, employee, and/or servant of the other named Defendants herein, defamed, libeled and/or slandered Plaintiffs by intentionally, willfully, recklessly and/or negligently publicizing and informing third parties of falsehoods pertaining to Plaintiffs, and their employment, including but not limited to publicizing via various nationally broadcast television programs and nationally distributed newspapers, which are broadcast and distributed within the State of New Jersey, that Plaintiffs engaged in and/or presently are attempting to extort money from Defendant Williams.
3. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid intentional, willful retaliation and reprisals, Plaintiffs were caused and will continue to experience substantial loss of income and benefits, expenses related to professional counseling, enormous emotional distress, trauma, psychological and/or psychiatric damages, pain and suffering, as well as humiliation, loss of respect and esteem, and adverse affects upon their daily personal, social and business life.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, for compensatory and punitive damage, equitable relief, counsel fees, pre and post judgment interest, court costs and any other relief the Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances.
EIGHTH COUNT
(Reprisal/Retaliation-Violation of New Jersey Law Against Discrimination)
1. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every paragraph of each and every Count herein as if set forth at length herein.
2. Defendants in retaliation and in reprisal for Plaintiffs filing this Complaint on June 7, 1995 for practices in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination and for pursuing their discrimination claims set forth herein have and are intentionally and willfully publicizing and informing third parties that Plaintiffs attempted to extort money from their employers/Defendants, which is violative of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.
3. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid intentional, willful retaliation and reprisals, Plaintiffs were caused and will continue to experience substantial loss of income and benefits, expenses related to professional counseling, enormous emotional distress, trauma, psychological and/or psychiatric damages, pain and suffering, as well as humiliation, loss of respect and esteem, and adverse affects upon their daily personal, social and business life.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, for compensatory and punitive damage, equitable relief, counsel fees, pre and post judgment interest, court costs and any other relief the Court may deem just and appropriate under the circumstances.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiffs herewith make demand for trial by jury on all issues raised herein.
/s/
W. RANDOLPH KRAFT ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
DATED: June 17, 1996
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO R.4:5
The undersigned attorney for Plaintiffs hereby certifies that the within matter is not the subject of any other action or arbitration proceeding pending or contemplated, nor are there any other parties known to plaintiffs who should joined in this proceeding.
