ALLEGAERT BERGER & VOGEL LLP - Thomson Reuters News ...

Case 2:11-cv-01065-TFM Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/11 Page 1 of 2

Case 2:11-cv-01065-TFM Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/11 Page 2 of 2

Violet Elizabeth Grayson (VEG-2792)
Attorney at Law
SB#: CA 122611
548 West 148 th Street
New York, New York 10031
(646) 406-1512
vegrayson@gmail.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
--------------------------------------------------------------X
SUSAN PATROSKI, :
:
Plaintiff, :
: COMPLAINT
-against- :
: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PRESSLEY RIDGE, PRESSLEY RIDGE :
FOUNDATION, AND B. SCOTT FINNELL, : ECF Filing
:
Defendants. :
--------------------------------------------------------------X
Introduction
1. Plaintiff, Susan Patroski, seeks damages for sexual harassment, retaliatory dismissal,
sexual battery, and related causes of action, arising out of her employment with Defendant
Pressley Ridge, and her interaction with former Pressley Ridge Chief Executive Officer, B. Scott
Finnell.
1

Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue
2. Plaintiff Susan Patroski (“Patroski”) is a natural person.
3. Defendant Pressley Ridge is a not-for-profit corporation with its principal place of
business at 5500 Corporate Drive, Suite 400, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15237.
4. Defendant Pressley Ridge Foundation (the “Foundation”) is, upon information and
belief, a foundation or not-for-profit corporation, with its principal place of business at 5500
Corporate Drive, Suite 400, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15237.
5. Defendant B. Scott Finnell (“Finnell”) is a natural person, and the former Chief
Executive Officer of Defendant Pressley Ridge.
6. Plaintiff invokes this Court’s federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
section 1331, because the action states claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. sections 2000(e) et seq. Plaintiff further invokes this court’s supplemental
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1367.
7. Venue is properly laid in the Western District of Pennsylvania, as all events giving rise
to this action occurred in this District, and two defendants maintain principal places of business
within this District.
Facts
8. Beginning in 2008, Patroski was employed in the Human Resources Department of
Pressley Ridge. On June 1, 2009, she was promoted to the position of Human Resources
Coordinator. Throughout her employment with Pressley Ridge, one of Patroski’s supervisors was
Chief Executive Officer, B. Scott Finnell.
2

9. Commencing on December 24, 2008, Finnell purported to treat Patroski for “stress”
with a “relaxation technique,” which was in fact hypnosis. Finnell told Patroski that the
“relaxation sessions” were necessary not merely for her own benefit, but also because he was
making a relaxation compact disk for the Pressley Ridge Wellness Program. Thus, the sessions
were appropriately part of her duties as a member of the Pressley Ridge Human Resources
Department. Nonetheless, Finnell also instructed Patroski not to tell anyone about the “relaxation
sessions.”
10. The hypnosis sessions occurred on a frequent basis over the course of approximately
a year, always behind closed doors in Finnell’s office, on what Finnell referred to as his “magic
couch.” During the hypnosis sessions, while Patroski was hypnotized, Finnell stroked Patroski’s
breasts, and repeatedly brought her to orgasm, utilizing the hypnotic suggestion that he would
slowly count to five, and when he reached five, she would experience a rush of pleasure.
11. During the period when Finnell was hypnotizing Patroski, he also repeatedly told her
that she was very attractive, and requested that she accompany him to his house during the lunch
hour when his wife was out. Patroski declined the invitation.
12. Immediately after each hypnosis session, Patroski could not recall what transpired.
But she often noticed that the cardigan she had been wearing when she entered Finnell’s office
was now on her arm, or that the fashion in which the cardigan was buttoned had changed. She
also noticed that her underpants were very damp. On one occasion, she was involved in an
automobile collision while still foggy from a hypnosis session.
13. Beginning in December of 2009, Patroski began recalling what transpired during the
so-called “relaxation sessions.” The recollections which surfaced included not only the “count-
down to orgasm” sequence described above, but also:
3

a) being on the floor in front of Finnell, and having her head between his legs;
b) Finnell saying: “I’m touching you, but you’re so relaxed, you’re so deeply asleep, you
don’t even feel it”;
c) a clicking sound, which may have been a camera, leading Patroski to now fear that she
was photographed in a state of dishabille.
14. When the above memories surfaced, Patroski sent an e-mail to Finnell, expressing her
concerns. She also confided in co-worker, Linda Kady. Ms. Kady informed Patroski that Finnell
was trained as a hypnotist, and had attempted to hypnotize her to stop smoking. Patroski
subsequently learned that a number of other female employees had been hypnotized.
15. After Finnell discovered that Patroski was remembering details of the hypnosis
sessions and discussing the subject of hypnosis with other personnel, he moved to push her out
of the organization. On February 22, 2010, Patroski was asked to resign and execute a release,
because she allegedly implied to co-workers that she had a sexual relationship with Finnell.
When Patroski declined to resign, she was barred from executive committee meetings, prohibited
from speaking to anyone in upper management, stripped of her duties as Human Resources
Coordinator, and demoted to the lesser position of Benefits Coordinator.
16. The foregoing actions constituted a material deterioration in the conditions of
Patroski’s employment, particularly because previously, Finnell had lead Patroski to expect that
she would be promoted to Assistant Director of Human Resources after she finished her PHR
certification in June 2010, and to Director of Human Resources after she finished her Master’s
Degree in 2011.
17. In April of 2010, Patroski brought the foregoing circumstances to the attention of the
Board of Directors of Pressley Ridge, and requested redress. None was forthcoming.
4

Pittsburgh.
18. On June 2, 2010, Patroski filed a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC office in
19. On June 4, 2010, Pressley Ridge terminated Patroski’s employment, in further
retaliation for complaining of sexual harassment and reporting said sexual harassment to both the
Board of Directors and the EEOC. Adding insult to injury, Pressley Ridge objected to Patroski’s
unemployment claim.
20. On June 8, 2010, the EEOC issued Patroski a Right to Sue Letter. On July 22, 2010,
Patroski filed suit against Pressley Ridge, the Foundation, and Finnell, in the Federal District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. On December 7, 2010, the District Court
dismissed the action without prejudice, opining that the EEOC issued its Right to Sue Letter
prematurely. On December 21, 2010, the EEOC withdrew its Right to Sue Letter in light of the
Court’s opinion, and commenced investigation and conciliation. These efforts did not result in
resolution of the matter, and on July 13, 2011, the EEOC issued a new Right to Sue Letter.
21. During the period described in the foregoing paragraph, the Board of Directors of
Pressley Ridge learned that Finnell had indeed hypnotized numerous female employees and
engaged in other misconduct warranting his dismissal. Finnell was dismissed from his post, but
Pressley Ridge did not apologize to Patroski, much less offer suitable reparation.
First Cause of Action Against Pressley Ridge - Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment In Violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
herein.
22. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-21
23. The facts and circumstances described above violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
insofar as Patroski was required to participate in the “relaxation sessions” during which she was
5

hypnotized and sexually molested by her supervisor, and also to remain silent about the hypnosis
and sexual molestation, as a quid pro quo for her continued employment. When Patroski ceased
to silently acquiesce, the conditions of her employment materially deteriorated, and shortly
thereafter she was fired.
24. Finnell’s actions in hypnotizing and sexually molesting Patroski, and then having her
fired, were so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible
bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized
community. The actions of Pressley Ridge, in initially protecting Finnell and firing Patroski,
after Finnell’s hypnosis and molestation of Patroski came to light, were likewise so outrageous in
character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be
regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Also, outrageous,
indecent, and intolerable, was the failure of Pressley Ridge to offer any apology or meaningful
reparation to Patroski after the full extent of Finnell’s misconduct became known.
25. Patroski has suffered serious damage as a consequence of the quid pro quo sexual
harassment described above. In addition to extraordinary mental anguish so severe as to be
disabling, cause her to feel physically ill, and amount to a physical injury, Patroski has suffered
from loss of salary, damage to reputation, and loss of opportunity for future career advancement.
Second Cause of Action Against Pressley Ridge – Hostile Workplace Sexual Harassment In
Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
herein.
26. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-25
27. The occurrences described above subjected Patroski to a Hostile Workplace, in
violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After Patroski realized that she had been
6

hypnotized and sexually assaulted by Finnell, and raised the subject with Kady and Finnell
himself, Pressley Ridge did everything possible to force Patroski from her job, and make her
continued employment as unpleasant, uncomfortable, and unrewarding as possible, pending her
ultimate termination. Indeed, the conditions under which Patroski worked between February 22,
2010 and June 4, 2010 were so severely and pervasively hostile as to be intolerable.
28. The actions of Finnell and Pressley Ridge in deliberately creating a Hostile
Workplace for Patroski after she discovered Finnell’s misconduct, were malicious, vile, wanton,
and lawless. Indeed, they were so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go
beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in
a civilized community.
29. Patroski has suffered serious damages as a consequence of the Hostile Workplace
sexual harassment described above. In addition to severe and disabling mental anguish
amounting to physical injury, she has suffered from loss of salary, damage to reputation, and loss
of opportunity for future career advancement.
Third Cause of Action Against Pressley Ridge – Retaliation In Violation of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964
herein.
30. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-29
31. Defendant Pressley Ridge retaliated against Patroski for her objection to and protest
of the conduct in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by first rendering the
conditions of her employment so intolerable as to amount to constructive termination, and then
formally terminating her employment and protesting her unemployment application. This
retaliatory conduct itself constitutes a violation of Title VII.
7

32. The actions of Finnell and Pressley Ridge in retaliating against Patroski for
exercising her rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were willful, malicious, vile,
wanton and lawless. They were so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go
beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in
a civilized community
33. Patroski has suffered serious damages as a consequence of the retaliatory conduct
described above. In addition to severe and disabling mental anguish amounting to physical
injury, she has suffered from loss of salary, damage to reputation, and loss of opportunity for
future career advancement.
herein.
Fourth Cause of Action Against Finnell For Sexual Assault
34. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-33
35. Finnell hypnotized Patroski, and then, while she was under the influence of hypnosis
and unable to resist, touched her sexually and caused her to engage in involuntary sexual
activities with him. This constituted sexual assault.
36. Finnell’s conduct in first claiming that he was only going to “relax” Patroski, and
then hypnotizing her and taking advantage of her sexually, was so outrageous in character, and
so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as
atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
37. When memories of Finnell’s sexual assault surfaced in Patroski’s mind, they caused
Patroski extraordinary mental anguish so severe as to constitute a debilitating injury which
rendered Patroski physically ill.
8

Fifth Cause of Action Against Finnell and Pressley Ridge for Fraudulent Misrepresentation
37 herein.
38. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
39. On December 28, 2008, in his Pressley Ridge Office, located at 5500 Corporate
Drive, Suite 400, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Finnell represented to Patroski that if she reposed her
trust in him during the “relaxation sessions,” and followed his suggestions, she would experience
benefit in the form of stress relief. He further represented that the relaxation sessions were
necessary for the preparation of the relaxation compact disc which was part of the Pressley Ridge
Wellness Program, and that her participation as an employee of Pressley Ridge in the Human
Resources Department was therefore appropriate.
40. Finnell made the foregoing representations in his capacity as CEO of Pressley Ridge
and as Patroski’s supervisor. In subsequently employing the “relaxation technique,” which was
in fact hypnosis, Finnell acted with apparent authority as an officer and agent of Pressley Ridge.
41. When Finnell made the foregoing representations, he knew that they were false,
because he would hypnotize and sexually molest Patroski, rather than simply relaxing her, and
this would ultimately cause Patroski grave injury rather than stress relief.
42. Patroski relied upon Finnell’s false representations set forth above by participating in
the so-called relaxation sessions, which were in fact hypnosis sessions during which she was
sexually assaulted.
43. Patroski’s reliance upon the false representations was reasonable and foreseeable in
light of her employment relationship with Pressley Ridge, Finnell’s position as Chief Executive
Officer of Pressley Ridge, and all of the other circumstances set forth above.
9

44. As previously set forth herein, Patroski was greatly injured by the fraudulent
misrepresentation. She is entitled to compensation for her injuries.
45. The actions of Finnell and Pressley Ridge, as set forth in this Cause of Action for
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, were so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to
go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable
in a civilized community, thus entitling Patroski to punitive as well as compensatory damages.
herein.
Sixth Cause of Action Against Finnell for Fraud
46. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-45
47. On December 24, 2008, in his Pressley Ridge office, located at 5500 Corporate Drive,
Suite 400, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Finnell promised Patroski that if she repeatedly came to his
office, sat on his couch, and followed the procedures he suggested, he would engage her in safe
and beneficial “relaxation sessions” teaching her a technique to relieve stress.
48. Finnell knew this promise to be false at the time when he made it because his
intention was to hypnotize Patroski and engage in sexual activity with her while she was
hypnotized, thereby benefitting himself while harming Patroski.
49. Patroski foreseeably and actually relied upon Finnell’s false promise by repeatedly
coming to his office, sitting on his couch, and participating in good-faith in the so-called
“relaxation sessions” where she was in fact hypnotized and sexually abused.
50. Finnell thereby benefitted from his false and fraudulent promise while Patroski, as
previously set forth herein, suffered harm.
10

51. Finnell’s actions described in this Fraud Cause of Action were so outrageous in
character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be
regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
herein.
Seventh Cause of Action Against Finnell For Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
52. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference, the allegations of paragraphs 1-51
53. By taking the actions previously set forth herein, including tricking Patroski into
participating in the “relaxation sessions,” hypnotizing her, sexually assaulting her, and then
causing Pressley Ridge to first render her conditions of employment intolerable and then fire her,
Finnell caused Patroski grave and debilitating emotional distress amounting to a physical injury.
Patroski has become emotionally withdrawn from her family and friends. Physical effects of the
emotional distress suffered by Patroski include severe gastrointestinal upset, gynecological
disturbance, shaking, nightmares, and talking and crying in her sleep.
54. Finnell’s actions causing Patroski debilitating emotional distress and injury were so
outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of
decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
Eighth Cause of Action Against Pressley Ridge For Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
herein.
55. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-54
56. After Pressley Ridge learned that Finnell fraudulently hypnotized and sexually
molested Patroski, it deliberately protected Finnell and punished Patroski, first by creating a
11

Hostile Workplace where conditions of employment were unbearable, and then by terminating
Patroski’s employment and attempting to deny her unemployment. Then, after Pressley Ridge
learned the full extent of Finnell’s misconduct and terminated him, it still failed to apologize to
Patroski or offer her meaningful reparation.
57. This conduct caused Patroski grave and debilitating emotional distress amounting to
physical injury. Patroski has become emotionally withdrawn from her family and friends.
Physical effects of the emotional distress suffered by Patroski include severe gastrointestinal
upset, gynecological disturbance, shaking, nightmares, and talking and crying in her sleep.
58. The actions of Pressley Ridge, intentionally inflicting emotional distress upon
Patroski as set forth in this cause of action were so outrageous in character, and so extreme in
degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and
utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
Ninth Cause of Action Against Pressley Ridge for Negligence in Hiring And Supervising Finnell
herein.
59. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-58
60. As previously set forth herein, Patroski is not the first female employee of Pressley
Ridge to be hypnotized by Finnell, and, upon information and belief, not the first female
employee to be sexually assaulted by Finnell while hypnotized. Pressley Ridge, through its
Directors, Officers, and management level employees, including Chief Financial Officer Scott
W. Erickson, was aware that Finnell was hypnotizing female employees, before he ever
hypnotized Patroski. Pressley Ridge also knew or should have known, that Finnell was sexually
assaulting the employees he hypnotized, all of whom were both female and attractive. Even if
12

Pressley Ridge did not know, or have reason to know, that Finnell was sexually assaulting the
female employees he hypnotized, it knew, or should have known, that Finnell’s hypnosis of
female employees was improper, dangerous, and harmful in and of itself.
61. Pressley Ridge owed Patroski and every female employee a duty of care, to keep
them reasonably safe in the workplace.
62. Pressley Ridge breached this duty of care by failing to take action to prevent and stop
Finnell’s hypnosis of female employees.
63. Plaintiff is further informed and believes that Finnell engaged in misconduct similar
to the misconduct here, prior to joining Pressley Ridge as its Chief Executive Officer. Pressley
Ridge was negligent in failing to properly investigate Finnell before hiring him. A proper
investigation would have brought to light Finnell’s prior misconduct.
64. Plaintiff was injured as a consequence of Defendant Pressley Ridge’s negligence; if
Pressley Ridge had properly investigated Finnell’s past before hiring him, or taken appropriate
action when Finnell first began hypnotizing other female employees, Patroski would never have
been hypnotized and sexually assaulted.
65. As previously set forth herein, Patroski’s emotional, physical, and economic injury,
of which Pressley Ridge’s acts and omissions is the cause-in-fact, is severe and on-going.
Tenth Cause of Action Against Pressley Ridge for Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair
Dealing
herein.
66. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-65
13

67. The contract of employment between Patroski and Pressley Ridge contained a
covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied by law. The conduct of Pressley Ridge
previously set forth herein breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
68. Said breach of contract caused Patroski severe economic damage in the form of loss
of wages, loss of experience, and loss of opportunity for advancement at Pressley Ridge.
Eleventh Cause of Action To Pierce Corporate Veil of Pressley Ridge to Reach the Foundation
herein.
69. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs 1-68
70. The business of Pressley Ridge and the Foundation is in fact one business, operating
out of a single office, with unity of ownership and administrative control, each entity being the
alter ego of the other. The unitary business is organized – solely on paper – into two legal entities
so as to sequester all assets in the Foundation, while encapsulating all liabilities, actual and
potential, in the thinly-capitalized operating company known as Pressley Ridge, thereby
defrauding creditors. Plaintiff is further informed and believed that the corporate formalities of
two distinct entities are not observed.
71. The arrangement described in the preceding paragraph has the purpose and effect of
rendering the operating company, Pressley Ridge, judgment-proof as against persons such a
Plaintiff, with legitimate claims against it. The Foundation has no purpose other than to hold
assets for use by Pressley Ridge, in an entity where they cannot be reached by creditors. This
constitutes an abuse of the corporate form, such that the corporate veil of Pressley Ridge should
be pierced to reach the assets of the Foundation.
14

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS FOR JUDGMENT AS FOLLOWS:
On The First through Third Causes of Action (Title VII)
Entering judgment against Pressley Ridge and in favor of Patroski, for front-pay, back-
pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees, all according to proof, and
all as authorized by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended.
On the Fourth Cause of Action (Sexual Assault)
Entering judgment against Finnell and in favor of Patroski, for compensatory and
punitive damages according to proof.
On the Fifth Cause of Action (Fraudulent Misrepresentation)
Entering judgment in favor of Patroski, jointly and severally against Pressley Ridge and
Finnell, for both compensatory and punitive damages according to proof.
On the Sixth Cause of Action (Fraud)
Entering judgment against Finnell and in favor of Patroski for compensatory and punitive
damages according to proof.
15

On the Seventh Cause of Action (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress By Finnell)
Entering judgment against Finnell and in favor of Patroski for compensatory and punitive
damages according to proof.
On the Eighth Cause of Action (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress By Pressley Ridge)
Entering judgment against Pressley Ridge and in favor of Patroski for compensatory and
punitive damages according to proof.
On the Ninth Cause of Action (Negligent Hiring and Supervision)
Entering judgment against Pressley Ridge and in favor of Patroski for compensatory
damages according to proof.
On the Tenth Cause of Action (Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing)
Entering judgment against Pressley Ridge and in favor of Patroski for compensatory
damages according to proof.
On the Eleventh Cause of Action (Veil Piercing Claim Against the Foundation)
Declaring the corporate veil of Pressley Ridge pierced to reach the Foundation, and
declaring the Foundation jointly and severally liable for any judgment entered in favor of
Patroski and against Pressley Ridge in this action.
16

On All Causes of Action
1) Awarding compensatory and punitive damages, in a total amount of not less than
$5,000,000, in favor of Patroski, jointly and severally against Finnell, Pressley Ridge, and
Pressley Ridge Foundation.
2) Awarding to Patroski, costs and attorneys fees if and as allowed by law;
3) Awarding such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
s/ Violet Elizabeth Grayson (VG-2792)
SB#: CA 122611
Attorney at Law
548 West 148 th Street
New York, N.Y. 10013
(646) 406-1512
vegrayson@gmail.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
17