Confidential vs Confidential Sexual Harassment
$250,000 Recovered for a California Female Worker
Setareh Law Group represented a female truck driver in a sexual harassment lawsuit that exposed not only egregious workplace misconduct but also shocking corporate negligence in hiring and supervision. Through tenacious investigation and skilled litigation, Mr. Setareh secured substantial compensation for his client and held both the individual perpetrator and the trucking company accountable
Due to confidentiality, party names and docket details aren’t public.
The Case at a Glance
Mr. Setareh’s client was a woman working in the male-dominated trucking industry. A field where female drivers often face unique challenges and vulnerabilities. She was assigned to work with a training supervisor who was supposed to mentor her and ensure she could safely and competently perform her job duties.
Instead, her training supervisor sexually harassed her, creating a hostile and abusive work environment that violated both federal and state civil rights laws.
Initial Denial and Legal Action
When the law firm initially filed a claim with the trucking company, the employer’s response was swift and predictable: they denied all allegations and refused to accept any responsibility for their employee’s conduct. This is an all-too-common response from companies hoping to avoid liability and discourage victims from pursuing their claims.
Undeterred, Mr. Setareh filed a lawsuit against:
- The trucking company – for allowing the harassment to occur and failing to protect their employee
- The training supervisor personally – holding the individual perpetrator directly accountable for his actions
The Shocking Discovery: A Convicted Child Molester
- Did the company conduct any background check before hiring this individual?
- If they discovered his criminal history, why was he placed in a supervisory position with vulnerable employees?
- If they failed to conduct a background check, why did they ignore basic safety protocols?
- How was a convicted sex offender allowed to work in close quarters with employees, including in the isolated environment of a truck cab?
This information demonstrated not just harassment, but negligent hiring and retention, the company’s failure to exercise reasonable care in selecting and supervising employees who would have direct, unsupervised contact with other workers.
Devastating Deposition Testimony
Through skillful questioning during depositions (sworn testimony taken before trial), Mr. Setareh was able to impeach, that is, discredit and contradict, both the training supervisor and other company-affiliated witnesses.
During depositions, Mr. Setareh likely exposed:
- Inconsistencies in the supervisor’s account of events
- False statements and attempts to cover up the harassment
- The company’s awareness (or willful ignorance) of prior complaints or red flags
- Inadequate or non-existent policies for preventing harassment
- Failure to properly investigate the harassment complaint
- Attempts by company witnesses to minimize or deny the severity of the conduct
When witnesses are impeached during depositions, it severely undermines their credibility and makes it extremely difficult for defendants to present a viable defense at trial. The company would have to put these discredited witnesses on the stand knowing that their prior contradictory statements would be used against them.
The Settlement
Faced with overwhelming evidence of both sexual harassment and corporate negligence in hiring a convicted sex offender. The trucking company recognized it had no viable defense. The risk of going to trial, where a jury would learn about the supervisor’s criminal history and the company’s failure to protect its employees, was simply too great.
The company agreed to settle the case for an equitable sum prior to trial, providing Mr. Setareh’s client with:
- Financial compensation for the trauma and harm she endured
- Vindication that she was telling the truth and was wronged
- Justice without having to endure the additional trauma of a public trial
- Recognition of the company’s failure to protect her
Understanding Workplace Sexual Harassment
Sexual harassment in the workplace is a serious civil rights violation prohibited by both federal law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).
1. Quid Pro Quo Harassment
- When employment benefits are conditioned on sexual favors
- “Sleep with me or you’re fired” scenarios
- Promotions, raises, or job security tied to sexual compliance
2. Hostile Work Environment
- Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature
- Conduct that is severe or pervasive enough to create an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment
- Interferes with work performance or creates an abusive atmosphere
Common Forms of Sexual Harassment Include:
- Unwanted physical touching or advances
- Sexual comments, jokes, or innuendos
- Displaying sexually explicit materials
- Making comments about someone’s body or appearance
- Sending explicit messages or images
- Creating a sexualized work environment
- Retaliation against those who report harassment
Employer Liability: When Companies Must Pay
In this case, the trucking company was liable for multiple reasons:
1. Vicarious Liability
Employers are automatically liable for harassment by supervisors that results in a tangible employment action (like firing, demotion, or denial of promotion). Even without a tangible action, employers can be liable if they failed to:
- Prevent the harassment from occurring
- Promptly correct the harassment once reported
- Maintain effective anti-harassment policies and complaint procedures
2. Negligent Hiring
Employers have a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring employees, especially those who will:
- Work in supervisory positions
- Have close contact with other employees or the public
- Work in isolated or vulnerable settings (like a truck cab)
Hiring a convicted child molester to supervise employees without proper vetting constitutes a clear breach of this duty.
3. Negligent Retention and Supervision Even if an employer didn’t know about an employee’s background at hiring, they can be liable for:
- Failing to conduct adequate background checks
- Ignoring warning signs or prior complaints
- Failing to properly supervise employees with access to vulnerable workers
- Retaining employees who pose a known danger
Why These Cases Matter:
For Victims:
Sexual harassment cases require immense courage to pursue. Victims often face retaliation, victim-blaming, and pressure to stay silent. This client’s willingness to stand up not only secured justice for herself but likely protected future employees from the same predator.
For Employers:
Companies cannot ignore their duty to:
- Conduct thorough background checks, especially for supervisory positions
- Implement and enforce strong anti-harassment policies
- Take complaints seriously and investigate promptly
- Create safe reporting mechanisms without fear of retaliation
- Remove dangerous employees who pose threats to others
For the Legal System:
The discovery process is critical. Without Mr. Setareh’s thorough investigation, the supervisor’s criminal history might never have been revealed, and the company might have escaped accountability for their negligent hiring practices.
Sexual Harassment in the Trucking Industry
Female truck drivers face unique vulnerabilities:
- Often work in isolated environments with male supervisors or trainers
- May be dependent on supervisors for training, certification, and continued employment
- Work in a historically male-dominated industry where harassment may be normalized
- Face retaliation risks if they report misconduct
- May have limited options to escape harassment during long-haul routes
These factors make strong legal protections and employer accountability especially critical.
Do you believe you've been denied any of these or other rights at work?
If you believe you have been a victim of any of these wage and hour violations, you don’t have to accept it. California law provides strong protections for workers, and you may be entitled to recover thousands of dollars in unpaid wages, penalties, and interest.
Many employees don’t realize that even seemingly small violations like missed meal breaks or a few minutes of off-the-clock work each day can add up to substantial compensation when calculated over time. You could be owed far more than you think.
Don't wait. California has strict deadlines for filing wage and hour claims.
Your case evaluation is 100% FREE, and you pay nothing unless we recover compensation for you. Click the button below to get started. Our experienced wage and hour attorneys will review your case and explain your rights at no cost and with no obligation.
Relevant Resources
Legal Information:
Support Resources:
- RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network) – National Sexual Assault Hotline: 1-800-656-4673
- National Women’s Law Center – Resources on workplace rights
- Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund – Support for harassment victims
Worker Rights:
- California Civil Rights Department – File complaints and learn about protections
The Courage to Come Forward
Mr. Setareh’s client demonstrated remarkable courage in refusing to accept her employer’s initial denial and pursuing justice through litigation. Her case not only provided her with compensation but also exposed a dangerous individual and a company’s negligent practices. Potentially protecting countless future employees from similar harm.
This case exemplifies why experienced legal representation matters. Without thorough investigation and aggressive advocacy, the training supervisor’s criminal history might never have been discovered, and the company might have continued placing employees at risk.
*Disclaimer: This information is provided for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Each case is unique, and outcomes depend on specific facts and circumstances. Consult with a qualified California employment attorney to discuss your individual situation. The settlements and case results summary overview described on this page represent outcomes in specific cases and should not be interpreted as a guarantee, warranty, or prediction of the outcome of any other case. Case valuations depend on numerous factors including the severity of injuries, the strength of evidence, the jurisdiction, and many other variables unique to each matter.
Practice Areas:
Table of Contents
- verified by Trustindex