You are on page 1of 34

SUPERVISION, AND

1
RETENTION; and
2 13. UNFAIR BUSINESS
PRACTICES (Bus. & Prof. Code
3 §§ 17200, et seq.)
4
Unlimited Civil Jurisdiction
5
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
6
7
8
9 Plaintiffs SERENA ANIS and KATHERINE SLOAT hereby allege as follows:

10 PARTIES

11 1. Plaintiff Serena Anis is and was, at all relevant times, an individual residing in

12 the State of California and the County of Los Angeles. Serena Anis was a student at Defendant

13 University of Southern California from 2009 to 2013, and was treated by Defendant George

14 Tyndall, M.D. between two and three times.

15 2. Plaintiff Katherine Sloat is and was, at all relevant times, an individual residing

16 in the State of California and the County of Los Angeles. Katherine Sloat was a student at

17 Defendant University of Southern California from 2010 to 2014, and was treated by Defendant

18 George Tyndall, M.D. at least two times.

19 3. Upon information and belief, Defendant George Tyndall, M.D. is and was, at all

20 relevant times, an individual residing in the State of California and the County of Los Angeles.

21 4. Upon information and belief, Defendant University of Southern California is and

22 was, at all relevant times, a California corporation with its principal place of business in the

23 State of California and the County of Los Angeles.

24 5. The true names and capacities of DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, whether

25 individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time and when

26 Plaintiffs ascertain the true names and capacities of said Defendants, they will ask leave of

27 court to amend their complaint by setting forth the same. At all times herein mentioned, the

28 Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, servants, co-owners, and employees, each of

-2-
COMPLAINT
1 the other, acting within the course and scope of said agency and employment. The negligence
2 and willful conduct of each Defendant combined to cause the subject incident and injuries to
3 Plaintiffs.
4 6. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each of the
5 Defendants, including DOES 1 through 50, are the agent, employee, alter ego, servant,
6 successor-in-interest and/or joint venturer of each other Defendant and that in doing the things
7 herein alleged, each Defendant was acting within the course, scope, and authority of such
8 agency, employment, service, successor-in-interest and/or joint venture. Plaintiffs are further
9 informed and believe that each Defendant as aforesaid, when acting as a principal, was
10 negligent in the selection and hiring of each and every other Defendant as an agent, servant,
11 employee, successor-in-interest, and/or joint venturer. Further, the acts of each Defendant
12 were consented to, ratified and/or authorized and confirmed by each other Defendant.
13 7. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each of the
14 Defendants is responsible for the damages caused to Plaintiffs.
15 8. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants DOES 1
16 through 50, inclusive, and have therefore sued them by the foregoing names which are
17 fictitious, and Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each of the said
18 Defendants is liable to Plaintiffs jointly and severally in this action, and Plaintiffs ask that
19 when their true names and capacities are discovered, this Complaint may be amended by
20 inserting their true names and capacities in lieu of said fictitious names.
21 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
22 9. This Court has jurisdiction over the present matter because the nature of the
23 claims and amounts in controversy meet the requirements for unlimited jurisdiction in the
24 Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
25 10. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure
26 section 410.10, because all parties are domiciled within the State of California.
27 11. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 395(a), venue is proper because
28 Plaintiffs’ injuries occurred within the jurisdiction of this Court in the County of Los Angeles,
-3-
COMPLAINT
1 California.
2 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
3 12. For nearly thirty years, Defendant George Tyndall, M.D. (hereafter “Dr.
4 Tyndall”) was the only full-time gynecologist employed by Defendant University of Southern
5 California (hereafter “USC”).
6 13. USC hired Dr. Tyndall in 1989. He accepted the position over more prestigious
7 and better-paying posts because he desired to work with the bright, sophisticated women
8 enrolled at USC. He was so enthusiastic about working with young, college-enrolled women
9 that he acquired a vanity license plate for his Acura that read: “COEDDOC.”
10 14. Complaints against Dr. Tyndall began almost as soon as he started practicing on
11 campus.
12 15. When Dr. Tyndall began treating female USC students, he was often
13 accompanied in the exam room by a female nurse or assistant known as a “chaperone”—a
14 practice that became less regular over the span of his career.
15 16. One of the earliest warning signs, which USC ignored, was the frequency with
16 which Dr. Tyndall photographed his young patients during gynecological exams. Multiple
17 chaperones lodged complaints against Dr. Tyndall during the 1990s, telling USC officials that
18 they questioned the motivations behind his penchant for photography, and noting that he had
19 taken pictures of hundreds of students’ vaginas without any evident necessity.
20 17. These complaints eventually forced Dr. Lawrence Neinstein, then the executive
21 director of USC’s student health clinic, to order Dr. Tyndall to remove his camera from the
22 examination room.
23 18. In the early 2000s, at least three of Dr. Tyndall’s patients submitted written
24 complaints to USC detailing his sexual abuse and harassment, including descriptions of his
25 inappropriate touching and remarks.
26 19. Upon information and belief, the oversight committee charged with monitoring
27 USC’s student health clinic was aware of these complaints, and even read them aloud at
28 committee meetings. However, neither the oversight committee nor other USC administrators
-4-
COMPLAINT
1 took any action whatsoever against Dr. Tyndall. Upon information and belief, no one
2 associated with USC even took the minimal step of informing Dr. Tyndall that complaints had
3 been lodged against him in the first place.
4 20. Over the ensuing years, at least eight formal complaints against Dr. Tyndall were
5 made part of his permanent record at USC. Some concerned racially insensitive remarks made
6 to African-Americans and Latinos.
7 21. In early 2013, complaints lodged against Dr. Tyndall by chaperones reached a
8 critical mass. Many of these complaints related to what Dr. Tyndall described as a “full body
9 scan” of a young patient for unusual moles.
10 22. Dr. Tyndall would regularly instruct patients to lie, fully naked, on his
11 examination table to enable him to inspect their body for moles—closely viewing every part
12 of their nude bodies, down to the area between their buttocks.
13 23. More troublingly, Dr. Tyndall often made inappropriate sexual comments about
14 his patients’ bodies during the “full body scan,” including describing their skin as “creamy”
15 or “beautiful,” and observing that their breasts were “perky”—one chaperone recalled Dr.
16 Tyndall telling a patient that her breasts “stand right up there, don’t they?”
17 24. Upon information and belief, a “full body scan” of the kind conducted by Dr.
18 Tyndall—particularly when coupled with his inappropriate remarks and behavior—is neither
19 a common nor accepted medical practice.
20 25. Eight chaperones lodged complaints against Dr. Tyndall in early 2013, which
21 were fielded by veteran nurse Cindy Gilbert. Ms. Gilbert relayed the complaints to Dr.
22 Neinstein—who had earlier demanded Dr. Tyndall cease photographing patients’ vaginas—
23 who then referred the complaints to USC’s Office of Equity and Diversity for a full
24 investigation.
25 26. Many of the complaining chaperones, Ms. Gilbert, and even Dr. Tyndall all
26 reported that they were never questioned by an investigator nor informed that an investigation
27 was underway. USC’s current executive director, Gretchen Dahlinger Means, claims that an
28 investigation was conducted, and that it found Dr. Tyndall did not violate USC policy.
-5-
COMPLAINT
1 27. The only discipline taken against Dr. Tyndall—as a result of eight chaperones
2 and a veteran nurse lodging complaints against him—was another order from Dr. Neinstein,
3 this time barring Dr. Tyndall from locking his office door when patients were inside.
4 28. At the same time chaperones began complaining about Dr. Tyndall’s “full body
5 scans,” they also began discussing Dr. Tyndall’s longstanding and inappropriate practice of
6 inserting his fingers into patients at the beginning of gynecological examinations.
7 29. Upon information and belief, gynecologists often insert two fingers inside their
8 patients at the end of an examination in order to assess the uterus for abnormalities.
9 30. Chaperones consistently witnessed Dr. Tyndall inserting his fingers into patients
10 at the very beginning of an examination, ostensibly in order to assert whether or not a speculum
11 would fit inside the patient. These chaperones reported that Dr. Tyndall often slid his fingers
12 in and out of patients while speaking to them about the viability of inserting a speculum to
13 begin the examination.
14 31. More troublingly, these chaperones reported that Dr. Tyndall attempted to
15 explain away his digital insertion by providing the same excuse, verbatim, over and over: that
16 the patient had a “tight muscle” and that they “must be a runner.”
17 32. These chaperones subsequently told the Los Angeles Times that Dr. Tyndall
18 made “nearly identical statements” to “hundreds of women” as his fingers were inside them.
19 And five people subsequently told the Los Angeles Times that they were aware of instances
20 in which Dr. Tyndall made explicit reference to sexual intercourse while his fingers were
21 inside patients.
22 33. Upon information and belief, Dr. Tyndall’s behavior during pelvic exams is
23 outside the scope of current medical practice. The Los Angeles Times reported that “Dr.
24 Sangeeta Mahajan, a national expert in pelvic pain, said she had never heard of a gynecologist
25 moving his fingers in and out of a patient to gauge whether a speculum would fit and called
26 the practice ‘very odd’ and ‘creepy.’”
27 34. Upon information and belief, an internal USC investigation determined that Dr.
28 Tyndall's behavior during pelvic exams was outside the scope of current medical practice and
-6-
COMPLAINT
1 amounted to sexual harassment of students.
2 35. Dr. Tyndall’s unlawful conduct also included requesting intimate and detailed
3 accounts of his patients’ sexual histories and practices, often under the guise of prescribing
4 birth control.
5 36. One student, an undergraduate from the Middle East, scheduled an appointment
6 with Dr. Tyndall to acquire a prescription for birth control. Dr. Tyndall questioned her about
7 her ethnic heritage and her virginity, and offered her a “little baggie of blood” that she could
8 use on her wedding night to convince her husband that she was a virgin.
9 37. Despite gynecologists commonly prescribing yearlong birth control to patients,
10 Dr. Tyndall only prescribed the student a two-month supply of birth control. When she
11 returned for another prescription, Dr. Tyndall asked more inappropriate and harassing
12 questions about her sexual history, including how many times she had tried to have sex and
13 whether or not she was “tight.”
14 38. Another student told the Los Angeles Times that, after seeking out sexual health
15 treatment, Dr. Tyndall recommended she visit “a sex shop he knew” and “described different
16 kinds of dildos . . . [h]e really emphasized the ones that looked more human looking, more
17 realistic looking. I remember him saying ‘veiny.’”
18 39. The Los Angeles Times reported that Dr. Tyndall asked another student, during
19 an appointment in 2015, how often she had anal and oral sex with her boyfriend.
20 40. Frustrated with the decades of complaints against Dr. Tyndall and USC’s
21 unwillingness to address his unlawful sexual abuse, Ms. Gilbert took the extraordinary step of
22 contacting USC’s rape crisis center in June 2016.
23 41. As a result, in January 2017, USC informed Dr. Tyndall that he had violated its
24 policy on sexual harassment. In May 2017, Ainsley Carry, the vice president of student affairs,
25 then proposed that Dr. Tyndall resign from his position and accept a severance.
26 42. Dr. Tyndall told the Los Angeles Times that USC’s offer was sweetened by Mr.
27 Carry’s promise that USC would not report Dr. Tyndall’s misconduct to the Medical Board of
28 California if he agreed to resign.
-7-
COMPLAINT
1 43. Thereafter, Dr. Tyndall accepted the severance package, and made his
2 resignation effective June 30, 2017. USC did not initially report any of Dr. Tyndall’s
3 misconduct to the Medical Board of California. Following public scrutiny, USC eventually
4 filed a belated report in March 2018—fourteen months after formally notifying Dr. Tyndall of
5 his misconduct and nearly eight months after Dr. Tyndall resigned from his post.
6 44. USC’s own president, C.L. Max Nikias, recently referred to Dr. Tyndall’s
7 decades-long history of abuse and harassment as “shameful.” On or about mid-May 2018,
8 USC set up a dedicated phone line to process the scores of complaints about Dr. Tyndall’s
9 abuse.
10 45. Mr. Nikias subsequently resigned as USC’s president after news outlets broke
11 the story of Dr. Tyndall’s decades-long pattern of sexual abuse and harassment. His
12 resignation came mere days after the submission of a USC faculty letter, signed by 200 USC
13 professors, and a change.org petition garnering thousands of signatures, both demanding he
14 step down immediately—and both specifically citing Mr. Nikias’ and USC’s gross
15 mishandling of Dr. Tyndall’s abuse as the reason Mr. Nikias should resign.
16 46. As alleged above, Defendants concealed the existence of Plaintiffs Serena Anis'
17 and Katherine Sloat's claims at the time of Dr. Tyndall's sexual abuse and harassment, and
18 conspired to keep their causes of action secret in the ensuing years. Defendants concealed
19 Plaintiffs' injuries and claims by misrepresenting Dr. Tyndall's acts of sexual abuse and
20 harassment as medically necessary procedures done for the purpose of conducting appropriate
21 gynecological services, and that his misconduct was in conformity with accepted medical
22 practices and standards.
23 47. Defendants accomplished this concealment through a widespread and systematic
24 effort to employ and retain medical staff, including chaperones, that would not or could not
25 report Dr. Tyndall's sexual abuse and assault. And when said medical staff, including
26 chaperones, did nevertheless report Dr. Tyndall's misconduct, Defendants actively concealed
27 the existence of these complaints, consistently failed to discipline Dr. Tyndall, and wholly
28 failed to warn Plaintiffs and the USC community that Dr. Tyndall posed a serious threat to
-8-
COMPLAINT
1 student safety. Defendants' systematic concealment of Plaintiffs' claims is further evidenced
2 by the fact that, once Dr. Tyndall's decades-long history of sexual abuse threatened to be
3 revealed, Ainsley Carry offered Dr. Tyndall a severance package with the understanding that
4 if Dr. Tyndall left USC, the university would not report him to the Medical Board of California.
5 48. Until news reports surfaced in 2018 regarding Dr. Tyndall's wrongful conduct
6 and Defendants' efforts to conceal that conduct, Plaintiffs Serena Anis and Katherine Sloat
7 were not aware of the true facts related to their sexual abuse and harassment at the hands of
8 Dr. Tyndall. Plaintiffs were college-age young women when Dr. Tyndall's sexual abuse began,
9 and have never had any specialized medical training nor been employed as medical
10 professionals.
11 Serena Anis
12 49. Plaintiff Serena Anis sought gynecological services during her time as a student
13 at USC. Medical staff at USC informed Ms. Anis that Dr. Tyndall was the only doctor
14 available for gynecological treatment. As such, Ms. Anis was treated by Dr. Tyndall
15 approximately two to three times between September 2009 and May 2013.
16 50. During those treatments, Dr. Tyndall never used gloves of any kind; he inserted
17 his bare finger and/or fingers into Ms. Anis’s vagina at the very beginning of the examinations.
18 No chaperone was present during Ms. Anis’ examinations.
19 51. Dr. Tyndall also commented about Ms. Anis’ race, inappropriately noting that
20 she had “pretty brown skin” during one of her gynecological examinations.
21 52. During the gynecological examinations, Dr. Tyndall would ask Ms. Anis for
22 graphic details of her sex life. While performing one such examination, Dr. Tyndall repeatedly
23 brought up the subject of “lube”—sexual lubricant—and continually mentioned a specific
24 brand, “Astroglide,” while graphicly describing its application and how Astroglide would
25 allow “it” to “slide in and out.” He also inappropriately and unexpectedly told Ms. Anis that
26 she was “pretty,” while smiling suggestively at her.
27 53. On at least one occasion, Dr. Tyndall insisted on bringing Ms. Anis back to his
28 office following her appointment. Once in his office, Dr. Tyndall would first close the door
-9-
COMPLAINT
1 before presenting Ms. Anis with a book containing pictures of vaginas exhibiting various
2 medical conditions. None of the conditions depicted in the photographs, however, related to
3 any condition for which Ms. Anis had sought treatment or were in any way related to her
4 gynecological examination.
5 54. Following the media’s exposure of Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse and harassment,
6 Ms. Anis has suffered significant emotional distress, and has sought and received
7 psychological treatment.
8 Katherine Sloat
9 55. Plaintiff Katherine Sloat sought gynecological services during her time as a
10 student at USC. Medical staff at USC informed Ms. Sloat that Dr. Tyndall was the only doctor
11 available for gynecological treatment. As such, Ms. Sloat was treated by Dr. Tyndall at least
12 two times between 2010 and 2014.
13 56. During those treatments, Dr. Tyndall never used gloves of any kind; he inserted
14 his bare finger and/or fingers into Ms. Sloat’s vagina at the very beginning of the examinations.
15 57. Ms. Sloat asked for a chaperone to be present during her examinations, but no
16 nurse, attendant, or any other USC staff member was ever made available to chaperone her
17 examinations with Dr. Tyndall. As such, she was left alone with Dr. Tyndall.
18 58. During the gynecological examinations, Dr. Tyndall would ask Ms. Sloat for
19 graphic details of her sex life. He inappropriately and unexpectedly told Ms. Sloat that she
20 was “pretty” during these examinations.
21 59. On one occasion, Ms. Sloat witnessed Dr. Tyndall throw her appointment
22 forms—which Ms. Sloat had just filled out in the waiting room—into the trash.
23 60. On another occasion, Dr. Tyndall repeatedly insisted that Ms. Sloat seek laser
24 removal of her pubic hair in order to “help with eczema.” When Ms. Sloat expressed confusion
25 about the necessity of this treatment, Dr. Tyndall became adamant and excited, again insisting
26 that Ms. Sloat remove her pubic hair on a daily basis, by shaving if necessary.
27 61. Because of Dr. Tyndall’s insistence, as well as his stature as a medical doctor
28 employed by USC, Ms. Sloat shaved her pubic hair on a daily basis for approximately 6 years.
- 10 -
COMPLAINT
1 Ms. Sloat only ceased this practice when the media began reporting on Dr. Tyndall’s
2 misconduct, and Ms. Sloat consulted with a new doctor, who informed her that daily shaving
3 of pubic hair is not a medically accepted treatment for eczema.
4 62. Following the media’s exposure of Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse and harassment,
5 Ms. Sloat has suffered significant emotional distress, and has sought and received
6 psychological treatment. She now relies on medication to cope with her emotional distress.
7 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
8 SEXUAL HARASSMENT (Civ. Code § 51.9)
9 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
10 63. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
11 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
12 64. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants were Defendant Dr. Tyndall, USC,
13 school administrators, supervisors, student health center staff of USC, and DOES 1 through
14 50. A business service or professional relationship therefore existed between Defendants and
15 Plaintiffs, who were patients under the care of Dr. Tyndall, a physician.
16 65. While attending USC as students, Plaintiffs required care from a gynecologist.
17 66. USC maintained medical facilities for the safety and well-being of its students.
18 USC entrusted Plaintiffs’ safety and care to Dr. Tyndall. Indeed, at the time of Plaintiffs’
19 sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation Dr. Tyndall was the only full-time
20 gynecologist available at USC’s medical facilities for students to see. Thus, many female
21 students, including Plaintiffs, were forced to repeatedly seek medical treatment from Dr.
22 Tyndall.
23 67. As such, Plaintiffs were vulnerable and unable to easily terminate their
24 professional relationship with Defendants.
25 68. Plaintiffs’ rights provided under Civil Code 51.9 include their right to be free
26 from sexual advances, solicitations, sexual requests, demands for sexual compliance by
27 Plaintiffs, or other verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature or of a hostile nature
28 based on Plaintiffs’ gender, that was unwelcome, pervasive, and severe.
- 11 -
COMPLAINT
1 69. While Plaintiffs were students at USC, Dr. Tyndall intentionally, recklessly, and
2 wantonly made sexual advances, solicitations, requests, demands for sexual compliance of a
3 hostile nature based on Plaintiffs’ gender that were unwelcome, pervasive, and severe,
4 including, but not limited to, Dr. Tyndall inappropriately touching and penetrating Plaintiffs’
5 vaginas, while acting in the course and scope of his agency with Defendants, and each of them.
6 70. The incidents of abuse outlined above took place while Plaintiffs were under the
7 control of Dr. Tyndall, USC, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, in their capacities and
8 positions as supervisors of physicians, medical professionals, and staff at USC and DOES 1
9 through 50, inclusive, and while acting specifically on behalf of Defendants, and each of them.
10 71. Because of Dr. Tyndall’s age and position of authority, physical seclusion of
11 Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ mental and emotional state, and Plaintiffs’ young ages, Plaintiffs were
12 unable to, and did not, give consent to such acts.
13 72. Even though the Defendants knew or should have known of the misconduct of
14 Dr. Tyndall, Defendants did nothing to investigate, supervise, or monitor Dr. Tyndall to ensure
15 the safety of the student-patients in their charge, including Plaintiffs.
16 73. Because of Plaintiffs’ relationship with Defendants, as student-patients of
17 Defendants, and Plaintiffs’ limited access to alternative providers, Plaintiffs were unable to
18 easily terminate the doctor-patient relationship they had with Defendants.
19 74. Despite constructive or actual knowledge of Dr. Tyndall’s prior assault of
20 Plaintiffs as well as others, USC and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, allowed Dr. Tyndall
21 unfettered access to Plaintiffs and other young, female patients. USC and DOES 1 through 50,
22 inclusive, thus aided and incited, and/or conspired in Plaintiffs’ abuse by allowing Dr. Tyndall
23 access to Plaintiffs and by failing to notify Plaintiffs and/or their parents of the prior abuse that
24 occurred.
25 75. Defendants' conduct, and the conduct of their agents, was a breach of their duties
26 to Plaintiffs.
27 76. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
28 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
- 12 -
COMPLAINT
1 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
2 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
3 GENDER VIOLENCE (Civ. Code § 52.4)
4 (Plaintiffs against Defendant Dr. Tyndall)
5 77. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
6 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
7 78. Dr. Tyndall’s acts committed against Plaintiffs, as alleged herein, including the
8 sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation of Plaintiffs, constitute gender violence
9 and a form of sex discrimination in that one or more of Dr. Tyndall’s acts would constitute
10 one or more criminal offenses under California law, and that those offenses have an element
11 of the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another,
12 committed, at least in part, based on the gender of the victim, whether or not those acts resulted
13 in criminal complaints, charges, prosecution, or conviction.
14 79. Dr. Tyndall’s acts committed against Plaintiffs, as alleged herein, including the
15 sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation of Plaintiffs, constitute gender violence
16 and a form of sex discrimination in that Dr. Tyndall’s conduct caused a physical intrusion or
17 physical invasion of a sexual nature upon Plaintiffs under coercive conditions, whether or not
18 those acts have resulted in criminal complaints, charges, prosecution, or conviction.
19 80. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
20 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
21 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
22 81. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,
23 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
24 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
25 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
26 similar conduct.
27 82. Plaintiffs are also entitled to an award of attorney's fees and costs pursuant to
28 Civil Code section 52.4.
- 13 -
COMPLAINT
1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
2 SEXUAL BATTERY (Civ. Code § 1708.5)
3 (Plaintiffs against Defendant Dr. Tyndall)
4 83. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
5 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
6 84. During Plaintiffs’ time as USC students, Dr. Tyndall intentionally, recklessly,
7 and wantonly committed acts which were intended to, and did, result in harmful and offensive
8 contact with intimate parts of Plaintiffs’ bodies, including, but not limited to, being subjected
9 to numerous instances of sexual abuse by Dr. Tyndall.
10 85. All of Dr. Tyndall’s conduct and behavior was carried out by Dr. Tyndall in the
11 course and scope of his agency/employment relationship with Defendants, and each of them,
12 and were intended to cause harmful or offensive contact with Plaintiffs’ bodies or intended to
13 put Plaintiffs in imminent apprehension of such contact.
14 86. Dr. Tyndall did the aforementioned acts with the intent to cause a harmful and/or
15 offensive contact with intimate parts of Plaintiffs’ bodies and would offend a reasonable sense
16 of personal dignity. Further, said acts did cause a harmful or offensive contact with intimate
17 parts of Plaintiffs’ bodies that would offend a reasonable sense of personal dignity.
18 87. Due to Dr. Tyndall’s position of authority over Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ mental and
19 emotional states, and Plaintiffs’ young age, Plaintiffs did not give meaningful consent to such
20 acts.
21 88. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
22 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
23 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
24 89. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,
25 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
26 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
27 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
28 similar conduct.
- 14 -
COMPLAINT
1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
2 VIOLATIONS OF BANE ACT (Civ. Code § 52.1)
3 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
4 90. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
5 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
6 91. Defendants' actions, alleged herein, have had and will continue to interfere with
7 Plaintiffs’ right to be free from gender discrimination in the form of sexual harassment and
8 sexual abuse in the educational and medical settings.
9 92. During Plaintiffs’ time as USC students, Defendants engaged in oppressive and
10 unlawful tactics in ignoring, concealing, and ultimately suppressing Plaintiffs’ sexual abuse,
11 harassment, molestation, and violation by Dr. Tyndall. Plaintiffs were threatened, intimidated,
12 and coerced into staying quiet about TYNDALL's sexually abusive conduct and into believing
13 that they had not been sexually abused. This was effectuated by Dr. Tyndall’s own intimidating
14 and humiliating conduct, as well as the conspiratorial silence and inaction of USC. These
15 intentional acts of concealment of Dr. Tyndall’s abusive behavior violated Plaintiffs’ rights to
16 be free from discrimination on the basis of their gender.
17 93. Furthermore, Plaintiffs were deprived of Due Process of Law, when various
18 complaints to USC failed to trigger any reprimand, investigation, or other action by USC, who
19 was required to do so, both under its own policies and federal law. In addition, these actions
20 were contrary to Plaintiffs’ civil rights guaranteed by the Constitutions of the United
21 California.
22 94. Defendants' wrongful conduct was intended to, and did successfully, interfere
23 with Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights to be free from gender discrimination, harassment, and
24 abuse, as well as their rights to due process.
25 95. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
26 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
27 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
28 96. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,
- 15 -
COMPLAINT
1 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
2 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
3 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
4 similar conduct.
5 97. Pursuant to Civil Code section 52.1(h), Plaintiffs are also entitled to reasonable
6 attorneys’ fees as determined by the Court.
7 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
8 VIOLATIONS OF UNRUH ACT (Civ. Code § 51.5)
9 (Plaintiffs against Defendants USC and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive)
10 98. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
11 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
12 99. Plaintiffs have a right to be free from gender discrimination, sexual abuse, and
13 sexual harassment under California and United States law. Plaintiffs’ civil rights were violated
14 by Defendants intentionally concealing complaints of sexual abuse and harassment by Dr.
15 Tyndall from Plaintiffs and other students.
16 100. Defendants denied Plaintiffs full and equal accommodations, advantages,
17 facilities, privileges and healthcare services because of their gender, by allowing Dr. Tyndall
18 unfettered access to sexually abuse Plaintiffs, by and through his position of authority as
19 USC’s sole full-time gynecologist with regular availability, and by actively concealing from
20 Plaintiffs that Dr. Tyndall had sexually assaulted hundreds of women and that USC had fielded
21 decades of complaints about his abuse.
22 101. By employing and retaining Dr. Tyndall as the sole full-time gynecologist with
23 regular availability, despite knowledge of myriad reports of Dr. Tyndall’s sexually abusive
24 conduct, USC nevertheless forced its female students to seek necessary medical treatment from
25 Dr. Tyndall, thereby exposing Plaintiffs to Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse. Thus, USC’s retention
26 of Dr. Tyndall, denied Plaintiffs, and all of its other young female students, full and equal
27 access to safe medical facilities, treatment, and services based on their gender.
28 102. The substantial motivating reason for USC’s conduct of actively concealing
- 16 -
COMPLAINT
1 numerous complaints of Dr. Tyndall’s sexually abusive nature was Plaintiffs’ gender, as USC
2 knew that only its female students would seek gynecological treatment from Dr. Tyndall, and
3 therefore would be unwittingly subjected to his sexual assaults.
4 103. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs have
5 suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they have
6 sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.

7 104. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,


8 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
9 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
10 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
11 similar conduct.
12 105. Pursuant to Civil Code section 52(a), Plaintiffs are entitled recover treble
13 damages from Defendants (in no case less than $4,000.00) as well as reasonable attorneys’
14 fees as determined by the Court.
15 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
16 SEXUAL ABUSE AND HARASSMENT AT AN
17 EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION (Educ. Code § 220)
18 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
19 106. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
20 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
21 107. Plaintiffs were harmed by being subjected to sexual abuse, harassment,
22 molestation, and violation at USC because of Plaintiff’s gender, and Defendants are
23 responsible for that harm.
24 108. Plaintiffs suffered harassment that was so severe, pervasive, and offensive that
25 it effectively deprived Plaintiffs of their right of equal access to educational benefits and
26 opportunities.
27 109. Defendants had actual knowledge that this sexual abuse, harassment,
28 molestation, and violation of Plaintiffs was occurring. As described above, USC, by and
- 17 -
COMPLAINT
1 through its employees, agents, and managers, witnessed Dr. Tyndall’s abuse firsthand, as it
2 was witnessed by numerous USC-employed chaperones, nurses, and other employees. Further,
3 USC received, and then actively suppressed and ignored, numerous complaints of Dr.
4 Tyndall’s sexual abuse and harassment.
5 110. In the face of this knowledge of sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and
6 violation that was being perpetrated upon Plaintiffs and others by Dr. Tyndall, Defendants
7 acted with deliberate indifference towards responding to these complaints and reasonable
8 suspicions. Defendants allowed Dr. Tyndall to remain as a physician at USC to sexually harass,
9 abuse, molest, and violate other patients.
10 111. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
11 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
12 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
13 112. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,
14 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
15 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
16 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
17 similar conduct.
18 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
19 FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
20 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
21 113. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
22 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
23 114. By holding Dr. Tyndall out as an agent of Defendants and by allowing him to
24 undertake the medical care of young patients such as Plaintiffs, Defendants entered into a
25 confidential, fiduciary, and special relationship with Plaintiffs. And by holding themselves
26 out as a preeminent collegiate facility, thereby enticing Plaintiffs to attend USC, Defendants
27 entered into a confidential, fiduciary, and special relationship with Plaintiffs.
28 115. Defendants breached their confidential, fiduciary, and special duties to Plaintiffs
- 18 -
COMPLAINT
1 by the wrongful and negligent conduct described above and incorporated into this cause of
2 action and, in so doing, gained an advantage over Plaintiffs in matters relating to Plaintiffs’
3 safety, security, and health. In particular, in breaching such duties as alleged, Defendants were
4 able to sustain their status as an institution of high moral repute and preserve their reputation,
5 all at the expense of Plaintiffs’ further injury and in violation of Defendants' mandatory duties.
6 116. By virtue of their confidential, fiduciary, and special relationship with Plaintiffs,
7 Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to: investigate or otherwise confirm or deny such claims of
8 sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation; reveal such facts to Plaintiffs, the USC
9 community, the public at large, and law enforcement agencies; refuse to place Dr. Tyndall and
10 other violators in positions of trust and authority within Defendants' institutions; refuse to hold
11 out Dr. Tyndall and other violators to the public, the USC community, parents, and law
12 enforcement agencies as being in good standing and trustworthy in keeping with him and his
13 position as a physician, faculty member, and authority figure; refuse to assign Dr. Tyndall and
14 other violators to positions of power within USC and over young students; and disclose to
15 Plaintiffs, the USC community, the public at large, and law enforcement agencies the
16 wrongful, tortious, and sexually exploitative acts that Dr. Tyndall has engaged in.
17 117. Defendants' breach of their respective duties included: not making reasonable
18 investigations of Dr. Tyndall; issuing no warnings about Dr. Tyndall; permitting Dr. Tyndall
19 to routinely be supervised only by untrained or negligent chaperones who were consistently
20 derelict in their duty to report Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and
21 violation to law enforcement; not adopting a policy to prevent Dr. Tyndall from routinely
22 having patients and students in his unsupervised control; making no reports of any allegations
23 of Dr. Tyndall’s abuse of students prior to or during his employment and/or agency at USC;
24 and assigning and continuing to assign Dr. Tyndall to duties which placed him in positions of
25 authority and trust over other student-patients, positions in which Dr. Tyndall could easily
26 isolate and sexually abuse other student patients.
27 118. The misrepresentations, suppressions, and concealment of facts by Defendants
28 were intended to, and were likely to, mislead Plaintiffs and others to believe that Defendants
- 19 -
COMPLAINT
1 had no knowledge of any charges against Dr. Tyndall, or that there were no other charges of
2 unlawful or sexual misconduct against Dr. Tyndall or others, and that there was no need for
3 them to take further action or precaution.
4 119. The misrepresentations, suppressions and concealment of facts by Defendants
5 were likely to mislead Plaintiffs and others to believe that Defendants had no knowledge of
6 the fact that Dr. Tyndall was a sexual abuser, harasser, molester, and violator, and was known
7 to commit wrongful sexual acts with student-patients, including Plaintiffs.
8 120. Defendants knew at the time they intentionally suppressed and concealed the
9 true facts regarding Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation that
10 they were fabricating a false sense of security regarding the safety and propriety of Dr.
11 Tyndall’s medical practices.
12 121. Defendants suppressed and concealed the true facts regarding Dr. Tyndall with
13 the purpose of: preventing Plaintiffs and others from learning that Dr. Tyndall and others had
14 been and were continuing to sexually abuse, harass, molest, and violate patients while under
15 Dr. Tyndall’s and Defendants' control, direction, and guidance, with complete impunity;
16 inducing people, including Plaintiffs and other benefactors and donors, to participate and
17 financially support Defendants’ programs and other enterprises of Defendants; preventing
18 further reports and outside investigations in Dr. Tyndall and Defendants' conduct; preventing
19 discovery of Defendants' own misconduct; avoiding damage to the reputations of Defendants;
20 protecting Defendants' power and status in the community and the educational community;
21 avoiding damage to the reputation of Defendants, or Defendants' institutions; and avoiding the
22 civil and criminal liability of Defendants, of Dr. Tyndall, and of others.
23 122. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants, with knowledge of the tortious nature
24 of their own and Dr. Tyndall’s conduct, knowingly conspired and gave each other substantial
25 assistance to perpetrate the misrepresentations, fraud, and deceit alleged herein—covering up
26 the past allegations of sexual misconduct lodged against Dr. Tyndall and allowing him to
27 remain in his position as physician, faculty member, and doctor so they could maintain their
28 reputations and continue with their positions within the organization.
- 20 -
COMPLAINT
1 123. Plaintiffs and others were misled by Defendants' suppressions and concealment
2 of facts, and in reasonable reliance thereon were induced to act or induced not to act exactly
3 as intended by Defendants. Specifically, Plaintiffs were induced to believe that there were no
4 allegations of criminal or sexual abuse against Dr. Tyndall, that he performed only medically
5 necessary and reasonable medical procedures in line with accepted and standard medical
6 practices, and that he was safe to be around patients. Had Plaintiffs, and others, known the true
7 facts about Dr. Tyndall, they would have not participated further in activities of Defendants or
8 continued to financially support Defendants' activities. Plaintiffs would have also reported the
9 matters to the proper authorities and to other patients so as to prevent future recurrences.
10 124. By giving Dr. Tyndall the position of physician and faculty member, Defendants
11 represented that Dr. Tyndall was safe and morally fit to give medical care and provide
12 gynecological treatment.
13 125. When Defendants made these affirmative or implied representations and non-
14 disclosures of material facts, Defendants knew that they were false. Defendants knowingly
15 and intentionally suppressed the material facts that Dr. Tyndall had on numerous prior
16 occasions sexually, physically, and mentally abused patients of Defendants, and Defendants
17 knew of conduct by Dr. Tyndall which placed Defendants on notice that Dr. Tyndall had long
18 been suspected of tortious sexual conduct and abuse of patients, and was abusing student-
19 patients in his care.
20 126. Because of Plaintiffs’ young age, and because of the status of Dr. Tyndall as an
21 authority figure, Plaintiffs were vulnerable to Dr. Tyndall. He was empowered by and
22 accepted Plaintiffs’ vulnerability. Plaintiffs’ vulnerability also prevented them from
23 effectively protecting themselves from the sexual advances of Dr. Tyndall, including, in part,
24 by rendering Plaintiffs unable to recognize Dr. Tyndall’s acts for what they truly were.
25 127. Defendants had the duty to obtain and disclose information relating to the sexual
26 misconduct of Dr. Tyndall.
27 128. Defendants intentionally misrepresented, concealed, and failed to disclose
28 information relating to sexual misconduct of Dr. Tyndall.
- 21 -
COMPLAINT
1 129. Defendants knew that they had misrepresented, concealed, and failed to disclose
2 information related to the sexual misconduct of Dr. Tyndall.
3 130. Plaintiffs justifiably relied upon Defendants for information relating to the
4 safety, security history, character, authority, ability, morality, and trustworthiness of Dr.
5 Tyndall.
6 131. Defendants, and each of them, in concert with each other, and with the intent to
7 conceal and defraud, conspired and came to a meeting of the minds whereby they would
8 misrepresent, conceal, and fail to disclose information relating to the sexual misconduct of Dr.
9 Tyndall, the inability of Defendants to supervise or stop Dr. Tyndall from sexually abusing,
10 harassing, molesting, and violating student-patients, including Plaintiffs, and their own failure
11 to properly investigate, supervise, and monitor his conduct.
12 132. By so concealing and defrauding, Defendants committed at least one act in
13 furtherance of the conspiracy.
14 133. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
15 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
16 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
17 134. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,
18 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
19 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
20 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
21 similar conduct.
22 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
23 NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
24 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
25 135. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
26 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
27 136. By holding Dr. Tyndall out as an agent of Defendants and by allowing him to
28 undertake the medical care of young patients such as Plaintiffs, Defendants entered into a
- 22 -
COMPLAINT
1 confidential, fiduciary, and special relationship with Plaintiffs. And by holding themselves
2 out as a preeminent collegiate facility, thereby enticing Plaintiffs to attend USC, Defendants
3 entered into a confidential, fiduciary, and special relationship with Plaintiffs.
4 137. Defendants breached their confidential, fiduciary, and special duties to Plaintiffs
5 by the wrongful and negligent conduct described above and incorporated into this cause of
6 action and, in so doing, gained an advantage over Plaintiffs in matters relating to Plaintiffs’
7 safety, security, and health. In particular, in breaching such duties as alleged, Defendants were
8 able to sustain their status as an institution of high moral repute and preserve their reputation,
9 all at the expense of Plaintiffs’ further injury and in violation of Defendants' mandatory duties.
10 138. By virtue of their confidential, fiduciary, and special relationship with Plaintiffs,
11 Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to: investigate or otherwise confirm or deny such claims of
12 sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation; reveal such facts to Plaintiffs, the USC
13 community, the public at large, and law enforcement agencies; refuse to place Dr. Tyndall and
14 other violators in positions of trust and authority within Defendants' institutions; refuse to hold
15 out Dr. Tyndall and other violators to the public, the USC community, parents, and law
16 enforcement agencies as being in good standing and trustworthy in keeping with him and his
17 position as a physician, faculty member, and authority figure; refuse to assign Dr. Tyndall and
18 other violators to positions of power within USC and over young students; and disclose to
19 Plaintiffs, the USC community, the public at large, and law enforcement agencies the
20 wrongful, tortious, and sexually exploitative acts that Dr. Tyndall has engaged in.
21 139. Defendants' breach of their respective duties included: not making reasonable
22 investigations of Dr. Tyndall; issuing no warnings about Dr. Tyndall; permitting Dr. Tyndall
23 to routinely be supervised only by untrained or negligent chaperones who were consistently
24 derelict in their duty to report Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and
25 violation to law enforcement; not adopting a policy to prevent Dr. Tyndall from routinely
26 having patients and students in his unsupervised control; making no reports of any allegations
27 of Dr. Tyndall’s abuse of students prior to or during his employment and/or agency at USC;
28 and assigning and continuing to assign Dr. Tyndall to duties which placed him in positions of
- 23 -
COMPLAINT
1 authority and trust over other student-patients, positions in which Dr. Tyndall could easily
2 isolate and sexually abuse other student patients.
3 140. The misrepresentations, suppressions, and concealment of facts by Defendants
4 were intended to, and were likely to, mislead Plaintiffs and others to believe that Defendants
5 had no knowledge of any charges against Dr. Tyndall, or that there were no other charges of
6 unlawful or sexual misconduct against Dr. Tyndall or others, and that there was no need for
7 them to take further action or precaution.
8 141. The misrepresentations, suppressions and concealment of facts by Defendants
9 were likely to mislead Plaintiffs and others to believe that Defendants had no knowledge of
10 the fact that Dr. Tyndall was a sexual abuser, harasser, molester, and violator, and was known
11 to commit wrongful sexual acts with student-patients, including Plaintiffs.
12 142. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known at the time they suppressed
13 and concealed the true facts regarding Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse, harassment, molestation,
14 and violation that they were fabricating a false sense of security regarding the safety and
15 propriety of Dr. Tyndall’s medical practices.
16 143. Defendants suppressed and concealed the true facts regarding Dr. Tyndall with
17 the purpose of: preventing Plaintiffs and others from learning that Dr. Tyndall and others had
18 been and were continuing to sexually abuse, harass, molest, and violate patients while under
19 Dr. Tyndall’s and Defendants' control, direction, and guidance, with complete impunity;
20 inducing people, including Plaintiffs and other benefactors and donors, to participate and
21 financially support Defendants’ programs and other enterprises of Defendants; preventing
22 further reports and outside investigations in Dr. Tyndall and Defendants' conduct; preventing
23 discovery of Defendants' own misconduct; avoiding damage to the reputations of Defendants;
24 protecting Defendants' power and status in the community and the educational community;
25 avoiding damage to the reputation of Defendants, or Defendants' institutions; and avoiding the
26 civil and criminal liability of Defendants, of Dr. Tyndall, and of others.
27 144. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants, who knew or should reasonably have
28 known of the tortious nature of their own and Dr. Tyndall’s conduct, conspired and gave each
- 24 -
COMPLAINT
1 other substantial assistance to perpetrate the misrepresentations, fraud, and deceit alleged
2 herein—covering up the past allegations of sexual misconduct lodged against Dr. Tyndall and
3 allowing him to remain in his position as physician, faculty member, and doctor so they could
4 maintain their reputations and continue with their positions within the organization.
5 145. Plaintiffs and others were misled by Defendants' suppressions and concealment
6 of facts, and in reasonable reliance thereon were induced to act or induced not to act exactly
7 as intended by Defendants. Specifically, Plaintiffs were induced to believe that there were no
8 allegations of criminal or sexual abuse against Dr. Tyndall, that he performed only medically
9 necessary and reasonable medical procedures in line with accepted and standard medical
10 practices, and that he was safe to be around patients. Had Plaintiffs, and others, known the true
11 facts about Dr. Tyndall, they would have not participated further in activities of Defendants or
12 continued to financially support Defendants' activities. Plaintiffs would have also reported the
13 matters to the proper authorities and to other patients so as to prevent future recurrences.
14 146. By giving Dr. Tyndall the position of physician and faculty member, Defendants
15 represented that Dr. Tyndall was safe and morally fit to give medical care and provide
16 gynecological treatment.
17 147. When Defendants made these affirmative or implied representations and non-
18 disclosures of material facts, Defendants knew or should have reasonably known that they
19 were false. Defendants knew or should have reasonably known that Dr. Tyndall had on
20 numerous prior occasions sexually, physically, and mentally abused patients of Defendants,
21 and Defendants knew or should have reasonably known of conduct by Dr. Tyndall which
22 placed Defendants on notice that Dr. Tyndall had long been suspected of tortious sexual
23 conduct and abuse of patients, and was abusing student-patients in his care.
24 148. Because of Plaintiffs’ young age, and because of the status of Dr. Tyndall as an
25 authority figure, Plaintiffs were vulnerable to Dr. Tyndall. He was empowered by and
26 accepted Plaintiffs’ vulnerability. Plaintiffs’ vulnerability also prevented them from
27 effectively protecting themselves from the sexual advances of Dr. Tyndall, including, in part,
28 by rendering Plaintiffs unable to recognize Dr. Tyndall’s acts for what they truly were.
- 25 -
COMPLAINT
1 149. Defendants had the duty to obtain and disclose information relating to the sexual
2 misconduct of Dr. Tyndall.
3 150. Defendants knew or should have reasonably known that they were
4 misrepresenting, concealing, and failing to disclose information relating to sexual the
5 misconduct of Dr. Tyndall.
6 151. Defendants knew that they had misrepresented, concealed, and failed to disclose
7 information related to sexual misconduct of Dr. Tyndall.
8 152. Plaintiffs justifiably relied upon Defendants for information relating to the
9 safety, security history, character, authority, ability, morality, and trustworthiness of Dr.
10 Tyndall.
11 153. Defendants, and each of them, in concert with each other, knew or should have
12 reasonably known that they were misrepresenting, concealing, and failing to disclose
13 information relating to the sexual misconduct of Dr. Tyndall, the inability of Defendants to
14 supervise or stop Dr. Tyndall from sexually abusing, harassing, molesting, and violating
15 student-patients, including Plaintiffs, and their own failure to properly investigate, supervise,
16 and monitor his conduct.
17 154. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
18 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
19 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
20 NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
21 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
22 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
23 155. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
24 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
25 156. Defendants' conduct toward Plaintiffs as described herein was outrageous and
26 extreme. A reasonable person, were they aware of the true nature of Defendants' acts, would
27 not expect or tolerate the sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and abuse of Plaintiffs by Dr.
28 Tyndall and Defendants' knowledge and callous indifference thereof. Plaintiffs had great trust,
- 26 -
COMPLAINT
1 faith, and confidence in Defendants, which, upon discovery and by virtue of Dr. Tyndall’s and
2 Defendants' wrongful conduct, turned to fear.
3 157. A reasonable person, were they aware of the true nature of Defendants' acts,
4 would not expect or tolerate Defendants' putting Dr. Tyndall, who was known to Defendants
5 to have physically and sexually abused, harassed, molested, and violated other student patients,
6 in a position of care and trust with Plaintiffs and others which enabled Dr. Tyndall to have
7 access to Plaintiffs and others so that he could commit wrongful sexual acts, including the
8 conduct described herein.
9 158. A reasonable person, were they aware of the true nature of Defendants' acts,
10 would not expect or tolerate Defendants’ unwillingness to supervise, discipline, and otherwise
11 prevent Dr. Tyndall from committing wrongful sexual acts with Plaintiffs and other patients.
12 159. Defendants' conduct described herein was intentional and malicious and done
13 for the purpose of causing, or with knowledge to a substantial certainty, that Plaintiffs would
14 suffer humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress.
15 160. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
16 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
17 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
18 161. The aforementioned conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious,
19 fraudulent, despicable, highly reprehensible and done with the intent to subject Plaintiffs to
20 unjust hardship, and as such warrants imposition of punitive and exemplary damages against
21 Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter others from engaging in
22 similar conduct.
23 TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
24 NEGLIGENCE
25 (Plaintiffs against Defendants USC and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive)
26 162. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
27 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
28 163. Prior to and after the first incident of Dr. Tyndall’s sexual abuse, harassment,
- 27 -
COMPLAINT
1 molestation and violation of young female students, including Plaintiffs, through the present,
2 Defendants knew or should have known that Dr. Tyndall had and was capable of sexually,
3 physically, and mentally abusing and harassing young female students, including Plaintiffs.
4 164. Universities are in a special relationship with their enrolled students in the
5 context of school-sponsored activities over which the university has some measure of control.
6 Defendants, and each of them, had special duties to protect Plaintiffs and other young female
7 students and members of the USC community. Plaintiffs’ care, welfare, and physical custody
8 was entrusted to Defendants.
9 165. Defendants voluntarily accepted the entrusted care of Plaintiffs. As such,
10 Defendants owed Plaintiffs and other young female students and members of the USC
11 community a special duty of care that adults and medical professionals dealing with vulnerable
12 medical patients and young students owe to protect them from harm. The duty to protect and
13 warn arose from the special, trusting, confidential, and fiduciary relationship between
14 Defendants and Plaintiffs.
15 166. Defendants breached their duties of care owed to Plaintiffs and others by:
16 allowing Dr. Tyndall to come into contact with Plaintiffs and other young female students
17 without effective supervision; by concealing from Plaintiffs, the USC community, the public
18 at large, and law enforcement that Dr. Tyndall was sexually abusing, harassing, molesting, and
19 violating patients; and by holding Dr. Tyndall out to Plaintiffs and all others as being of high
20 moral and ethical repute, in good standing, and trustworthy.
21 167. Defendants breached their duties to Plaintiff by: failing to investigate or
22 otherwise confirm or deny such facts of sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation
23 by Dr. Tyndall; by failing to reveal such facts to Plaintiffs, the USC community, the public at
24 large, and law enforcement agencies; and by placing Dr. Tyndall into a position of trust and
25 authority, holding him out to Plaintiffs and the public as being in good standing and
26 trustworthy.
27 168. Defendants breached their duties to Plaintiffs by failing to prevent Dr. Tyndall
28 from committing wrongful sexual acts with medical patients, including Plaintiffs. Defendants'
- 28 -
COMPLAINT
1 voluminous past records of sexual misconduct by Dr. Tyndall caused Defendants to know, or
2 gave them information where they should have reasonably known, of Dr. Tyndall’s lack of
3 fitness to serve as a physician and faculty member at Defendants' institutions, providing for
4 the physical care of young females.
5 169. Defendants breached their duties to Plaintiffs by failing to develop and
6 implement reasonable safety policies and procedures that would have prevented the sexual
7 abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation made the basic subject matter of this suit.
8 170. Defendants breached their duties to Plaintiffs by failing to adequately train their
9 employees and agents and to ensure that they were following proper protocol when it came to
10 recognizing reporting, and stopping sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation of
11 young female students. Specifically, Defendants allowed USC chaperones to stand idly by
12 while such acts of sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation were being committed
13 directly before them and were within their power and authority to stop and prevent.
14 171. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
15 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
16 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
17 ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
18 NEGLIGENCE PER SE
19 (Plaintiffs against Defendants USC and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive)
20 172. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
21 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
22 173. Under applicable law, Defendants, and each of them, by and through their
23 employees and agents, were medical care providers and were under a statutory duty to report
24 known or reasonably suspected incidents of sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and
25 violation of student-patients or any individuals in their care to the appropriate authorities and
26 not to impede the filing of any such report.
27 174. Defendants knew or should have known that Dr. Tyndall had, was, and likely
28 would again sexually abuse, harass, molest, and violate student-patients resulting in unwanted
- 29 -
COMPLAINT
1 sexual touching, sexual battery, harm, and other injuries to young female student members of
2 the USC community, including Plaintiffs, giving rise to a duty to report such conduct.
3 175. Defendants knew, or should have reasonably known, that an undue risk to
4 patients, including Plaintiffs, existed because Defendants did not comply with mandatory
5 reporting requirements.
6 176. By failing to report the continuing sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and
7 violation committed by Dr. Tyndall, which Defendants knew or reasonably should have known
8 about, and by ignoring the fulfillment of the mandated compliance with the reporting
9 requirements, Defendants created the risk and danger contemplated by the applicable
10 mandated reporting laws, and as a result, unreasonably and wrongfully exposed Plaintiffs and
11 other young student-patient members of the USC community to the same sexual abuse,
12 harassment, molestation, and violation.
13 177. As USC students, Plaintiffs were a member of the class of persons for whose
14 protection applicable mandated reporting laws were specifically adopted to protect.
15 178. Had Defendants adequately reported the molestation of Plaintiffs and others as
16 required by applicable mandated reporting laws, further harm to Plaintiffs and others would
17 have been avoided.
18 179. As a proximate result of Defendants' failure to follow the mandatory reporting
19 requirements, Defendants wrongfully denied Plaintiffs and others the intervention of law
20 enforcement and the appropriate authorities. Such public agencies would have changed the
21 then-existing arrangement and conditions that provided the access and opportunities for the
22 sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation of Plaintiffs and others by Dr. Tyndall.
23 180. The physical, mental, and emotional damages and injuries resulting from the
24 sexual abuse harassment, molestation, and violation of Plaintiffs by Dr. Tyndall were the type
25 of occurrence and injuries that the applicable mandated reporting laws were designed to
26 prevent.
27 181. As a proximate result, Defendants' failure to comply with the mandatory
28 reporting requirements constituted a per se breach of Defendants' duties to Plaintiffs.
- 30 -
COMPLAINT
1 182. Defendants, and each of them, breached their duty to Plaintiffs by, inter alia,
2 failing to adequately monitor and supervise Dr. Tyndall and stop him from committing
3 wrongful sexual acts with patients, including Plaintiffs.
4 183. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
5 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
6 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
7 TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
8 NEGLIGENT HIRING, SUPERVISION, AND RETENTION
9 (Plaintiffs against Defendants USC and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive)
10 184. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
11 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
12 185. By virtue of Plaintiffs’ special relationship with Defendants, and each of them,
13 and Defendants' relation to Dr. Tyndall, Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to not hire or retain
14 Dr. Tyndall, given his dangerous and exploitative propensities which Defendants knew or
15 should have known about had they engaged in a reasonable, meaningful, and adequate
16 investigation of his background prior to his hiring or retention of him in subsequent positions
17 of employment.
18 186. At no time during the period material hereto did Defendants have in place a
19 reasonable system or procedure to investigate, supervise, and monitor its physicians,
20 chaperones, healthcare professionals, and other employees and agents, including Dr. Tyndall,
21 to prevent pre-sexual grooming or sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation of
22 student-patients and members of the USC community. Nor did Defendants implement a system
23 or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct toward student-patients and other members of the
24 USC community in Defendants' care.
25 187. Defendants were aware, or reasonably should have been aware, of how
26 vulnerable young female students were to sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation
27 by faculty members, physicians, and other persons of authority within the control of
28 Defendants prior to Plaintiffs’ sexual abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation by Dr.
- 31 -
COMPLAINT
1 Tyndall.
2 188. Defendants were put on notice and should have known that Dr. Tyndall had
3 previously engaged and continued to engage in unlawful sexual conduct with student-patients,
4 and that it was reasonably foreseeable that he was engaging or would engage in illicit sexual
5 activities with young female members of the USC community, including Plaintiffs, under the
6 cloak of his authority, confidence, and trust bestowed upon him through Defendants.
7 189. Defendants were placed on actual or constructive notice that Dr. Tyndall had
8 molested or was molesting patients, both before his employment with Defendants and during
9 that employment. Defendants had knowledge of inappropriate conduct and molestations
10 committed by Dr. Tyndall before and during his employment, yet chose to allow him to remain
11 unsupervised, or in conditions which were known to not deter or alter his behavior, where he
12 sexually abused, harassed, molested, and violated Plaintiffs.
13 190. Even though Defendants knew or reasonably should have known of these illicit
14 sexual activities by Dr. Tyndall, Defendants failed to use reasonable care in investigating Dr.
15 Tyndall and did nothing to reasonably supervise and monitor Dr. Tyndall to ensure the safety
16 of student-patients, including Plaintiffs.
17 191. Defendants' conduct was a breach of their duties to Plaintiffs.
18 192. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs
19 have suffered special and general damages, including severe emotional distress for which they
20 have sought psychological treatment, in an amount to be determined at trial.
21 THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
22 UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.)
23 (Plaintiffs against all Defendants)
24 193. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each and every allegation contained in the
25 preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as though fully set forth herein.
26 194. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Defendants
27 have engaged in unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices, including allowing Dr.
28 Tyndall to engage in repeated harassment and abuse of student-patients, including Plaintiffs,
- 32 -
COMPLAINT
1 and failing to take reasonable steps to prevent harassment and abuse from occurring. The
2 unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices also included failing to adequately
3 investigate, vet, and evaluate individuals for employment at USC, refusing to design,
4 implement, and oversee policies regarding sexual harassment and abuse of student-patients in
5 a reasonable manner that is customary in similar educational environments.
6 195. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Defendants
7 have engaged in unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices including concealing sexual
8 abuse, harassment, molestation, and violation of student-patients, such as Plaintiffs, so as to
9 retain other similarly situated individuals within USC who were not apprised of such illicit
10 sexual misconduct by Dr. Tyndall.
11 196. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Defendants
12 engaged in a common scheme, arrangement, or plan to actively conceal sexual abusers and
13 allegations against them who were employees, agents, members, and/or participants at USC,
14 including Dr. Tyndall, such that Defendants could maintain their public image and avoid
15 detection of such abuse and abusers. Defendants actively concealed the above-described abuse
16 such that Defendants would be insulated from public scrutiny, governmental oversight, and/or
17 investigation from various law enforcement agencies, all done in order to maintain the false
18 sense of safety for participants and their families and to perpetuate USC’s financial security.
19 197. By engaging in unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices, Defendants
20 benefitted financially to the detriment of their competitors, who had to comply with the law.
21 198. As a result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiffs suffered severe injury and will
22 continue to be damaged in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this court in
23 an amount to be proven at the time of the trial.
24 199. Plaintiffs request an order requiring Defendants to provide complete equitable
25 monetary relief so as to prevent Defendants from benefiting from the wrongful practices
26 alleged herein, including restitution and/or disgorgement of all monies which may have been
27 acquired from Plaintiffs by means of such unfair competition. Plaintiffs are also entitled to
28 reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5.
- 33 -
COMPLAINT
1 PRAYER FOR RELIEF

2 WHEREFORE,Plaintiffs pray for relief as follows:


3 1 For economic damages in an amount according to proof;
4 2 For non-economic damages in an amount according to proof;
5 3 For prejudgment interest and interest on damages awarded to the maximum
6 extent permitted by law;
7 4. For punitive and exemplaty damages where permitted by law;
5 For all reasonable attorney’s fees where permitted by law;
6. For treble damages and civil penalties where permitted by law;
10 7 For costs of suit herein incurred; and
11 For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
12

13

14
Dated: юЛ^/г-о(? GAMMILL LAW,APC

15
By:
16 DAVID GAMMILL
Attorney for Plaintiffs
17
SERENA ANIS and

18 KATHEMNESFOAE

19

20

21 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

22
Plaintiffs Serena Anis and Katherine Sloat hereby demand a jury trial.
23

24 Dated;
ł/z-oiy GAMMILLLAW, APC
25

26 By:
DAVro GAMMILL
27 Attorney for Plaintiffs
SERENA ANIS and
28
KATHERINE SLOAT

-34-
COMPLAINT