Krafton Lawsuit Via Polygon

1 Victor L. George, State Bar No.
110504
Meylin P. Alfaro, State Bar No. 315177
2 LAW OFFICES OF VICTOR L. GEORGE
22760 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 200
3 Torrance, California 90505
Telephone: (310) 698-0990
4 Facsimile: (310) 698-0995
E-Mail: vgeorge@vgeorgelaw.com
5 malfaro@vgeorgelaw.com
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff,

A. GOERTZ
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
A. GOERTZ, an individual, CASE NO.
11
Plaintiff,
12 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
v.
13
1. HARASSMENT (SEX);
14 PUBG SANTA MONICA, INC., a business 2. DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION
entity, form unknown; OF FEHA, CALIFORNIA
15 PUBG ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a GOVERNMENT CODE §§12900,
business entity, form unknown; et seq.:
16 KRAFTON, INC., a business entity, form A. GENDER
unknown; 3. VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY;
17 STRIKING DISTANCE STUDIOS, INC., a 4. RETALIATION;
California corporation; 5. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
18 KRAFTON VENTURES FUND, L.P., a EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;
business entity, form unknown; 6. FALSE IMPRISONMENT.
19 KRAFTON VENTURES, INC., a business
entity, form unknown;
20 KRAFTON VENTURES, L.L.C., a
business entity, form unknown;
21 KRAFTON AMERICAS, INC., a business DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
entity, form unknown;
22 KEVIN KIMBALL, an individual; and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
23
Defendants.
24
25
26
27 Plaintiff A. GOERTZ, hereby complains and alleges against Defendants, and each
28 of them, as follows:
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 PRELIMINARY FACTUAL INFORMATION
2 1. Plaintiff A. GOERTZ (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”), is and at all times
3 mentioned herein, was an individual and a resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of
4 California.
5 2. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant PUBG SANTA MONICA,
6 INC. (hereinafter “PUBG”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at all times mentioned
7 herein, was and is authorized to do business in Los Angeles County, in the State of
8 California. Its principal place of business is located at 1601 Cloverfield Blvd., Suite 5000N,
9 Santa Monica, California 90404 in Los Angeles County, State of California, and was so
10 located during all pertinent times referred to herein.
11 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant PUBG ENTERTAINMENT,
12 INC. (hereinafter “PUBG ENTERTAINMENT”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at
13 all times mentioned herein, was and is authorized to do business in the State of California.
14 Its principal place of business is located at 6111 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite 150, San
15 Ramon, California 94583 in Contra Costa County, State of California, and was so located
16 during all pertinent times referred to herein.
17 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON, INC.
18 (hereinafter “KRAFTON”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at all times mentioned
19 herein, was and is authorized to do business in the State of California. Its principal place of
20 business is located at 1601 Cloverfield Blvd., Suite 5000N, Santa Monica, California 90404
21 in Los Angeles County, State of California, and was so located during all pertinent times
22 referred to herein.
23 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant STRIKING DISTANCE
24 STUDIOS, INC. (hereinafter “SDS”) is a California corporation with its principal place of
25 business located at 6111 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite 150, San Ramon, California 94583
26 in the Contra Costa County, State of California, and was so located during all pertinent times
27 referred to herein.
28
2
1 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON VENTURES
2 FUND, L.P. (hereinafter “KRAFTON FUND”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at
3 all times mentioned herein, was and is authorized to do business in the State of California.
4 Its principal place of business is located at 6111 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite 150, San
5 Ramon, California 94583 in the Contra Costa County, State of California, and was so located
6 during all pertinent times referred to herein.
7 7. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON VENTURES,
8 INC. (hereinafter “KRAFTON VENTURES”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at all
9 times mentioned herein, was and is authorized to do business in the State of California. Its
10 principal place of business is located at 6111 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite 150, San Ramon,
11 California 94583 in the Contra Costa County, State of California, and was so located during
12 all pertinent times referred to herein.
13 8. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON VENTURES,
14 L.L.C. (hereinafter “KRAFTON LLC”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at all times
15 mentioned herein, was and is authorized to do business in the State of California. Its
16 principal place of business is located at 6111 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite 150, San Ramon,
17 California 94583 in the Contra Costa County, State of California, and was so located during
18 all pertinent times referred to herein.
19 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON AMERICAS,
20 INC. (hereinafter “KRAFTON AMERICAS”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at all
21 times mentioned herein, was and is authorized to do business in Los Angeles County, in the
22 State of California. Its principal place of business is located at 1601 Cloverfield Blvd., Suite
23 5000N, Santa Monica, California 90404 in the Los Angeles County, State of California, and
24 was so located during all pertinent times referred to herein.
25 10. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Defendants PUBG, PUBG
26 ENTERTAINMENT, KRAFTON, SDS, KRAFTON FUND, KRAFTON VENTURES,
27 KRAFTON LLC and KRAFTON AMERICAS are all an alter ego of one another
28 (collectively referred to herein as “Defendants”) and are all authorized to do business in the
3
1 State of California.
2 11. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendant
3 KEVIN KIMBALL (hereinafter “KIMBALL”) was at all times mentioned herein, an
4 individual working in the Contra Costa County, in the State of California, and was so located
5 during all pertinent times referred to herein. KIMBALL was, at all times relevant herein an
6 executive / upper management and the “Vice President of Marketing” that had just been
7 promoted to “Head of Strategy and Business Development” at KRAFTON, and a resident
8 of the Contra Costa County, State of California.
9 12. Defendants, DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are sued herein under fictitious
10 names, their true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or
11 otherwise, being presently unknown to Plaintiff. Plaintiff will seek relief from this court to
12 amend this complaint to designate the true names and capacities of defendants DOES 1
13 through 100, inclusive, when same have been ascertained. The defendants designated as
14 DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, are or were otherwise responsible for all
15 of the acts hereinafter alleged.
16 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendants, and
17 each of them, are now and, at all times herein mentioned were alter egos, partners, co-
18 owners, associates, joint venturers, principals and agents and/or employers-employees of
19 each other and acted within the scope of such alter ego, partnership, association, joint
20 venture, agency, and/or employment in performing the acts and omissions alleged in this
21 complaint.
22 14. At all times herein, Defendants, and each of them were the principals and
23 agents, and employers and employees of each other, and were acting within the scope of their
24 agency and employment and by and through their officers, managers, supervisors, agents and
25 employees, and with each defendants’ authorization, permission, consent and ratification.
26 15. At all times, the actions by Defendants, and each of them, were done under
27 the authorization, consent, instruction and approval, express or implied, of each of the other
28 and were duly ratified by defendants, and each of them, and imputed to each of them.
4
1 16. Plaintiff A. GOERTZ, was a thirty-one (31) year old female working in the
2 Publishing Department of KRAFTON, from whom she was paid. Plaintiff was hired as a full
3 time employee in 2021. Plaintiff was always an outstanding employee, received excellent
4 evaluations and was paid $97,000.00 annually, with bonuses, full benefits, etc.
5 17. While Plaintiff was employed by Defendants, Plaintiff suffered a horrific
6 incident on December 8, 2022. At a work event/work related function, Plaintiff met
7 KIMBALL and a number of STRIKING DISTANCE managers / employees (including the
8 executive Blake Hennon who would soon fire the Plaintiff ) as well as her boss Andrew
9 Lobel at the Yard House Bar / Restaurant after the Video Game Awards, which Plaintiff’s
10 entire department (and many other people in the Defendant corporate entities) attended as
11 well. The drinking / party began at Yard House Bar and moved to a subsequent main event
12 “STRIKING DISTANCE” party where KIMBALL violated Plaintiff’s individual rights and
13 violated her rights guaranteed by public policy, based on her gender. Plaintiff suffered
14 egregious sex harassment and sexual assault from Defendant KIMBALL. Plaintiff
15 complained of such sex assault, sex abuse, sex harassment to Defendants. Plaintiff
16 complained of such tortious, hostile and offensive conduct and conditions by her employer
17 KIMBALL, a corporate leader / executive who was just promoted new “Head of Business
18 and Strategy” at KRAFTON, which horrific abuse was also created, caused and/or allowed
19 to exist by Defendants and each of them.
20 18. While Plaintiff worked for Defendants, Defendants tolerated, acquiesced,
21 encouraged, failed to protect, failed to investigate and allowed to exist, a hostile, oppressive,
22 dangerous and violent work environment for Plaintiff as created by Defendants’ executive
23 KIMBALL, a 55 year-old married man and an executive with Defendants who subjected the
24 31 year-old Plaintiff to sex assault, sex harassment, including, physical / sexual abuse, sexual
25 advances, physical touching, forced sex assault in a bathroom stall during the alcohol fueled
26 party sponsored by KRAFTON and all Defendants. Plaintiff rejected KIMBALL’s sexual
27 advances but as he provided her more and more alcohol, he finally forced himself on the
28 helpless Plaintiff until she was crying and finally escaped KIMBALL from the bathroom
5
1 stall.
2 19. Plaintiff continued to suffer daily from this abuse as Defendants ignored
3 Plaintiff, simply firing her two (2) months later on February 15, 2023. Defendants retaliated
4 against Plaintiff by wrongfully terminating her.
5 20. Defendants and each of them, including many managerial employees of all
6 Defendants, were in a position far superior to the low level worker Plaintiff and were aware
7 of the dominance, power abuse, power dynamic, harassment and/or retaliation of Plaintiff.
8 Defendants condoned such abuse, allowed it to exist, did not investigate the complaints /
9 allegations of Plaintiff of the oppressive situation, ignored Plaintiff, did not follow up with
10 Plaintiff, instead turning a blind eye (and ear) to Plaintiff, simply firing her just two (2)
11 months later.
12 21. Defendants, its officers, directors, managing agents, and each of them, were
13 aware of and had notice of this perverse, unwelcome, abusive, discriminatory, unequal and
14 harassing conduct suffered by Plaintiff in her work environment. These Defendants had the
15 right, duty, ability and power to protect Plaintiff (and all females) from such sex harassment,
16 sexual assault and alcohol fueled debauchery yet nothing was done to address KIMBALL’s
17 sex assault of the Plaintiff.
18 22. Having to work for and under Defendants, and with Defendants’ supervisors,
19 officers, directors, owners and managers failing to address/remedy the situation, has caused
20 and continues to cause Plaintiff great injuries, losses and damages.
21 23. Plaintiff pursued her administrative remedies by filing claims with the
22 California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) for statutory violations
23 including those for sex harassment, gender discrimination, retaliation for reporting such
24 behavior and wrongful termination, and was granted a “right to sue” prior to the filing of this
25 complaint.
26 24. Defendants herein interfered by sexual intimidation and coercion with the
27 exercise and enjoyment by Plaintiff of rights secured by the constitution and laws of
28 California, and as a result, Plaintiff was caused to suffer past, present and future injuries,
6
1 damages and losses, and simply fired two (2) months after the assault.
2 25. The unwelcome physical, mental, verbal and sexual abuse and illegal conduct
3 made by KIMBALL / Defendants created an intimidating, hostile, oppressive and offensive
4 environment / situation for Plaintiff, all to her past, present and future damages, injuries and
5 losses.
6 26. The tortuous, degrading and unwelcome acts of sexual violence, threats,
7 behavior and abuse that went unchecked, caused and causes Plaintiff continuing great fear,
8 disgrace, constant concern, embarrassment, job loss, always looking over her shoulder,
9 anxiety, paranoia and severe emotional distress which devastatingly and substantially
10 intruded into and violated Plaintiff’s privacy, causing her significant damage and loss,
11 leaving her without income and unemployed from full time work since suddenly fired on
12 February 15, 2023.
13 27. Defendants had a duty to timely and thoroughly investigate Plaintiff’s claims
14 of sexual harassment / abuse / assault / discrimination and report to Plaintiff regarding the
15 results of such investigation and remedy the situation; yet Defendants failed to fulfill any of
16 these legal obligations, simply choosing to discard Plaintiff by firing her (and refusing to pay
17 her).
18 28. When fired by Defendants, Plaintiff was receiving (but not limited to) the
19 following compensation and benefits:
20 a. Annual income of $97,000.00 per year;
21 b. Bonus;
22 c. Full Medical coverage;
23 d. Sick days when needed;
24 e. Three weeks vacation per year; and
25 f. Disability insurance.
26 29. Because of Plaintiff’s great fear, emotional distress, anxieties, physical
27 symptoms, feelings of powerlessness and helplessness stemming from the physical and
28 mental abuse, as well as lack of protection, discrimination, harassment, hostile work place,
7
1 stalking, unwelcome, and tortuous conduct and conditions presented to her within her job
2 and job duties in the work place, Plaintiff has, is and will be caused to suffer past, present
3 and future damages and losses. Plaintiff has been unable to find full time employment as her
4 confidence, spirit, trust, interview skills with prospective new employers, etc., are crushed.
5 She experiences great discomfort thinking of working for a new male stranger.
6 30. The conduct of defendants and the conditions allowed to exist while Plaintiff
7 worked were violative of public policy and laws of the State of California including, but not
8 limited to: the Constitution of the State of California, including Article I section 8;
9 California Government Code Sections 12900, et seq., including, but not limited to sections
10 12920, 12921, 12940, 12950, etc.
11 31. As a result of the conduct of defendants and the conditions allowed to exist
12 by Defendants while Plaintiff worked for them, Plaintiff was, is and will continue to be
13 caused to suffer damages, in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial, and
14 which includes but is not limited to, past, present and future injuries both mental and
15 physical, damages, severe emotional distress and losses, economic and special damages,
16 punitive damages, costs and attorneys’ fees.
17 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
18 STATUTORY HARASSMENT
19 (By Plaintiff Against All Defendants and Does 1 through 100)
20 32. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through
21 31 and incorporates the same by reference as though fully set forth herein.
22 33. Plaintiff pursued her administrative remedies by filing claims with the
23 California Department of Fair Employment and Housing against all defendants herein, within
24 one year of the continuing discrimination and the California Department of Fair Employment
25 and Housing closed its file and granted the right to sue prior to the filing of this lawsuit.
26 34. At all times set forth herein, and specifically including 2022 and continuing
27 thereafter to the horrific sexual abuse / assault event of December 8, 2022, Defendant’s
28 actions were violative of public policy and laws of the State of California including, but not
8
1 limited to: the Constitution of the State of California, including Article I section 8; California
2 Government Code Sections 12900, et seq., including, but not limited to §§ 12920, 12921,
3 12940, 12950, etc.
4 35. As a result of the statutory violations, Plaintiff suffered damages, in an
5 amount to be determined according to proof at trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional
6 minimum of this Court and includes past, present and future damages, injuries, losses,
7 punitive damages, costs and attorney fees.
8 36. Defendants are employers within the meaning of California Government Code
9 § 12926(d), and § 12940(h)(3).
10 37. Plaintiff was exceptionally qualified for the position, having at all times
11 performed the duties of the position with a high degree of competency and excellence.
12 38. The Plaintiff was subjected to harassment and abuse as well as being denied
13 rights and customary privileges of employment which other employees enjoyed.
14 39. Defendants’ conduct as herein-described was so severe and pervasive as to
15 alter the terms and conditions of Plaintiff's employment. Although Plaintiff protested the
16 acts, complained and informed Defendants that the above-described actions were sexual,
17 degrading, horrific, egregious, unwelcome, begged for protection and demanded the situation
18 be remedied to stop this type of conduct, Defendants failed to correct the problem, ignoring
19 Plaintiff until finally choosing to simply dispose of Plaintiff, by firing her on February 15,
20 2023.
21 40. Defendants' conduct as herein alleged violated the California Fair
22 Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"), California Government Code, including but not
23 limited to: Section 12940(a),(f),(I), in that it constituted unlawful harassment, and failure
24 to prevent harassment.
25 41. As a result of the statutory discriminatory treatment and violations, set forth
26 herein by Plaintiff, Plaintiff suffered injuries, damages, economic losses and emotional
27 distress, past, present and future and has already and will incur attorneys fees and costs in
28 prosecuting this action.
9
1 42. Because the acts taken toward Plaintiff were carried out by managerial
2 employees and partners of Defendants acting in a deliberate, cold, callous and intentional
3 manner in order to injure and damage Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests the assessment of punitive
4 damages against Defendants in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.
5 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
6 DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT
7 CODE §§12900, et seq., BASED ON: (A) GENDER.
8 (By Plaintiff Against All Defendants and DOES 1-50)
11 44. At all times mentioned herein, Government Code, §§12940-12965 et seq.,
12 were in full force and effect and were binding upon Defendants. Said sections specifically
13 required Defendants to refrain from discriminating against any employee on the basis of
14 gender.
15 45. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereupon alleges that her gender was a
16 substantial motivating factor contributing to the events of December 8, 2023, and Plaintiff’s
17 termination by Defendants on or about February 15, 2023.
18 46. To the extent that Plaintiff's gender was a substantial motivating factor
19 contributing to her sexual assault and Plaintiff’s termination by Defendants, said acts by
20 Defendants constitutes employment discrimination under the laws of the State of California,
21 of which gender is a "protected class." Such discriminatory actions were each substantial
22 factors in causing damages and injuries to Plaintiff as set forth in previous paragraphs.
23 47. Under FEHA, California Government Code §§ 12900, et seq., a person like
24 Plaintiff, cannot be discriminated against based on her gender.
25 48. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges, that at all times herein
26 mentioned, each of the Defendants were the agents and employees of each of the remaining
27 Defendants, and were in part acting within the course and scope of their employment.
28
10
1 49. The conduct set forth herein above was extreme and outrageous and an abuse
2 of the authority of Defendants, and each of them. Said conduct was intended to cause severe
3 emotional distress and was done in conscious disregard of the probability of causing such
4 distress. In particular, Defendants engaged in an intentional and dishonest course of conduct
5 to create a pretext because of Plaintiff’s gender.
6 50. As a direct result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff lost, and will
7 continue to lose, income and benefits, in an amount to be proven at trial. Plaintiff has become
8 depressed, distressed, emotionally devastated, anxious, humiliated, saddened, nervous and
9 embarrassed. This wrongful termination is a substantial factor in causing damage and injury
10 to Plaintiff as set forth above. As a direct result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff
11 has become mentally upset and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental and/or
12 emotional distress. Thereby, Plaintiff claims general damages for mental distress and
13 aggravation in a sum according to proof at the time of trial.
14 51. As a proximate result of Defendants’ discriminatory conduct, Plaintiff has and
15 will incur attorneys' fees and costs, which she is entitled to recover under California
16 Government Code § 12965(b).
18 employees of Defendants acting in a deliberate, cold, callous and intentional manner in order
19 to injure and damage Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests the assessment of punitive damages against
20 Defendants in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.
21 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
22 VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
23 (By Plaintiff Against All Defendants and DOES 1-100)
26 54. The above referenced actions of Defendants constitutes a wrongful
27 termination of Plaintiff in violation of the public policy of the State of California as reflected
28 in its laws and policies. Said laws include, but are not limited to, Article I, Section 8 of the
11
1 Constitution, as well as Government Code §12900, et seq. Defendants were obligated to
2 refrain from discharging Plaintiff, or any employee, for reasons which violate or circumvent
3 said policies or objectives which underlie each.
4 55. As a direct result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff lost, and will
5 continue to lose, income and benefits, in an amount to be proven at trial. This wrongful
6 termination is a substantial factor in causing damage and injury to Plaintiff as set forth above.
7 56. As a direct result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has become
8 mentally upset, distressed and aggravated and has suffered, and will continue to suffer,
9 humiliation, embarrassment and mental and/or emotional distress. Thereby, Plaintiff claims
10 general damages for mental distress and aggravation in a sum according to proof at the time
11 of trial.
13 employees and partners of Defendant acting in a deliberate, cold, callous and intentional
16 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
17 RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940(g),(h)
18 AND PUBLIC POLICY
22 59. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants
23 retaliated against Plaintiff by failing to protect Plaintiff, instead discriminating against her
24 after she finally rejected Defendant KIMBALL and complained to Defendants regarding the
25 abuse, harassment, discrimination and the hostile working environment at Defendants by
26 complaining of the above-stated sexual abuse / harassment / discrimination.
27 60. It is Plaintiff's legal right to reject sexual abuse and complain to her
28 supervisors about the hostile working environment and gender discrimination created by
12
1 Defendants against Plaintiff without her being retaliated against by her employer.
2 61. In doing the acts set forth above, Defendants retaliated against Plaintiff after
3 she complained to Defendants’ management about both sexual assault and the hostile
4 working environment and the discrimination she experienced.
5 62. As a proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has suffered harm,
6 including lost earnings and other employment benefits, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of
7 self esteem / self confidence, and mental anguish, all to Plaintiff’s damage in a sum to be
8 ascertained at trial.
9 63. As a proximate result of Defendants’s retaliatory conduct, Plaintiff has
10 incurred attorneys' fees and costs, which she is entitled to recover under California
11 Government Code § 12965(b) and California Civil Code § 52(b)(3).
13 employees and partners of Defendants acting in a deliberate, cold, callous and intentional
16 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
17 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
21 66. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants engaged in outrageous conduct
22 including sexually assaulting, sexually harassing, discriminatory, retaliatory and tortious
23 conduct against Plaintiff. These outrageous acts were done with the intent to cause severe
24 emotional distress and/or with reckless disregard of the probability of causing such severe
25 emotional distress.
26 67. Each individual Defendant set forth in this cause of action acted with the
27 consent, notice, authorization and ratification of Defendants and each officer, director or
28 managing agent of Defendants engaged in and failed to prevent the outrageous conduct
13
1 including, sexually assaulting, sexually harassing, discriminatory, retaliatory and tortuous
2 conduct against Plaintiff.
3 68. These outrageous acts were done with the intent to cause emotional distress
4 or with reckless disregard of the probability of causing such emotional distress.
5 69. As a result, Plaintiff was caused to suffer damages, including severe
6 emotional distress and is entitled to recover damages therefor, in an amount to be determined
7 according to proof at trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
8 70. As the conduct of defendants, and each of them, was done wilfully, recklessly,
9 oppressively and in conscious disregard of the rights and safety of Plaintiff and with the
10 authorization, notice and ratification of defendants, including each officer, director and
11 managing agent of Defendants, Plaintiff is accordingly entitled to an award of punitive
12 damages against defendants, and each of them, in an amount according to proof at trial.
13 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
14 FALSE IMPRISONMENT
18 72. During the time that Plaintiff did work for Defendants, Defendant KIMBALL
19 intentionally and unlawfully held, restrained, assaulted and detained Plaintiff, without her
20 consent, which caused Plaintiff to suffer damages, in an amount to be determined according
21 to proof at trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this Court, and includes past,
22 present and future damages, injuries, losses and costs.
23 73. Each Defendant named in this cause of action, was the employer or supervisor
24 of Plaintiff and had notice of and had the right and the duty to prevent and stop these actions
25 of intentional, offensive and unwelcome contact, sexual assault of Plaintiff, that was not
26 consented to and with conscious disregard for the safety of Plaintiff and accordingly,
27 authorized, consented to and ratified Defendant KIMBALL’s egregious, sexually unwelcome
28 and wrongful conduct.
14
1 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff A. GOERTZ requests relief against Defendants, and each
3 of them, as follows:
5 AS TO THE FIRST, SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH CAUSES OF ACTION:
6 1. That Plaintiff be awarded general, special and compensatory damages, including
7 prejudgment interest, in an amount according to proof at trial;
8 2. That Plaintiff be awarded costs of suit and interest incurred as provided by law;
9 3. That Plaintiff be awarded statutory attorneys’ fees;
10 4. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages; and
11 5. That this Court award such other and further relief as the Court deems just
12 and proper.
13
14 AS TO THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION:
15 1. That Plaintiff be awarded general, special and compensatory damages, including
16 prejudgment interest, in an amount according to proof at trial;
17 2. That Plaintiff be awarded costs of suit and interest incurred as provided by law;
18 3. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages; and
19 4. That this Court award such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
20 proper.
21
22 Dated: December 7, 2023 LAW OFFICES OF VICTOR L. GEORGE
23
24 By:
VICTOR L. GEORGE
25 MEYLIN P. ALFARO
Attorneys for Plaintiff
26 A. GOERTZ
27
28
15
1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Plaintiff A. GOERTZ hereby demands trial by jury in this action now before the
3 Court.
5 Dated: December 7, 2023 LAW OFFICES OF VICTOR L. GEORGE
7 By:
VICTOR L. GEORGE
8 MEYLIN P. ALFARO
Attorneys for Plaintiff
9 A. GOERTZ
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16

Krafton Lawsuit Via Polygon

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Krafton Lawsuit Via Polygon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Victor L. George, State Bar No.

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff,

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

2 1. Plaintiff A. GOERTZ (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”), is and at all times

5 2. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant PUBG SANTA MONICA,

10 located during all pertinent times referred to herein.

11 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant PUBG ENTERTAINMENT,

12 INC. (hereinafter “PUBG ENTERTAINMENT”) is a business entity, form unknown, and at

16 during all pertinent times referred to herein.

17 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON, INC.

23 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant STRIKING DISTANCE

6 during all pertinent times referred to herein.

7 7. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON VENTURES,

12 all pertinent times referred to herein.

13 8. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON VENTURES,

18 all pertinent times referred to herein.

19 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant KRAFTON AMERICAS,

24 was so located during all pertinent times referred to herein.

26 ENTERTAINMENT, KRAFTON, SDS, KRAFTON FUND, KRAFTON VENTURES,

3 KEVIN KIMBALL (hereinafter “KIMBALL”) was at all times mentioned herein, an

7 promoted to “Head of Strategy and Business Development” at KRAFTON, and a resident

8 of the Contra Costa County, State of California.

15 of the acts hereinafter alleged.

18 owners, associates, joint venturers, principals and agents and/or employers-employees of

5 17. While Plaintiff was employed by Defendants, Plaintiff suffered a horrific

6 incident on December 8, 2022. At a work event/work related function, Plaintiff met

7 KIMBALL and a number of STRIKING DISTANCE managers / employees (including the

19 to exist by Defendants and each of them.

20 18. While Plaintiff worked for Defendants, Defendants tolerated, acquiesced,

4 against Plaintiff by wrongfully terminating her.

17 sex assault of the Plaintiff.

20 and continues to cause Plaintiff great injuries, losses and damages.

3 made by KIMBALL / Defendants created an intimidating, hostile, oppressive and offensive

12 February 15, 2023.

19 following compensation and benefits:

20 a. Annual income of $97,000.00 per year;

22 c. Full Medical coverage;

23 d. Sick days when needed;

24 e. Three weeks vacation per year; and

26 29. Because of Plaintiff’s great fear, emotional distress, anxieties, physical

10 12920, 12921, 12940, 12950, etc.

13 caused to suffer damages, in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial, and

16 punitive damages, costs and attorneys’ fees.

17 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

19 (By Plaintiff Against All Defendants and Does 1 through 100)

3 12940, 12950, etc.

4 35. As a result of the statutory violations, Plaintiff suffered damages, in an

5 amount to be determined according to proof at trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional

7 punitive damages, costs and attorney fees.

9 § 12926(d), and § 12940(h)(3).

13 rights and customary privileges of employment which other employees enjoyed.

14 39. Defendants’ conduct as herein-described was so severe and pervasive as to

21 40. Defendants' conduct as herein alleged violated the California Fair

28 prosecuting this action.

4 damages against Defendants in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.

5 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

6 DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT

7 CODE §§12900, et seq., BASED ON: (A) GENDER.

8 (By Plaintiff Against All Defendants and DOES 1-50)

11 44. At all times mentioned herein, Government Code, §§12940-12965 et seq.,

17 termination by Defendants on or about February 15, 2023.

24 Plaintiff, cannot be discriminated against based on her gender.