Serious sex. harassment & SON wants to file suit; worried about job

[Guestquestioner]

My SON is seriously considering filing a law suit against former employer (he was fired after complaining about 10 times for sexual harassment) and it's daunting. He's been told by an atty. he spoke to that he would have to reveal his new job's name (almost took 2 yrs. to find a replacement job) (no statute of limitations yet) and the defendants could file all kinds of requests for documents or ask "leading questions" of his new HR dept. (like has he ever filed a sex. complaint against anyone in the company, etc., etc. {he hasn't!}.). He has a very strong case but LOVES his new job and doesn't want to jeopardize it if they can play dirty like that and make the new company worried and consider dropping him. We're in California. Can the defendants do that or ask nothing more than start date, name of company, etc.? Seems extremely unfair if it's allowed as it could certainly be used to intimidate the Plaintiff AND literally put their new job in jeopardy! Seems they should be entitled to previous (past) employers info but not intimate questions of the new employer, after-the-fact.

 

[cbg]

Sorry, but no one here is going to second-guess your son's lawyer.

 

[army judge]

If sonny paid an attorney, he should follow the REAL legal advice given to him by HIS attorney.

I was always taught to let sleeping dogs lie.

 

[Betty3]

It's going to have to be your son's decision whether he believes it is worth filing a lawsuit. He needs to seriously listen to what his lawyer has to say.

 

[Guestquestioner]

There seems to be a reading comprehension problem here by several. He hasn't yet hired an atty.; I was merely asking for an opinion, based on law, of whether or not, at least in Calif., it is allowed to ask THOSE kinds of questions of a Plaintiff re: an employer subsequent to an incident from a past employer. If they ARE allowed, then ANY Plaintiff would have to be concerned about the possibility of losing their current job due to potentially inappropriate and suggestive questions (of the new employer). I'm just not so sure the ans. he rec'd from the atty. was accurate - that's all. Don't need the "wise-acre" type of replies.

 

[Proserpina]

First and only warning.

Be polite.

Thanks.

 

[army judge]

There seems to be a reading comprehension problem here by several. He hasn't yet hired an atty.; I was merely asking for an opinion, based on law, of whether or not, at least in Calif., it is allowed to ask THOSE kinds of questions of a Plaintiff re: an employer subsequent to an incident from a past employer. If they ARE allowed, then ANY Plaintiff would have to be concerned about the possibility of losing their current job due to potentially inappropriate and suggestive questions (of the new employer). I'm just not so sure the ans. he rec'd from the atty. was accurate - that's all. Don't need the "wise-acre" type of replies.

I suggest you advise your son to seek the advice of an attorney licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction where your he resides.

What anyone is permitted to do in any trial is controlled by a body of law in the state, and the judge that presides over the case.

Plaintiffs and defendants litigate their cases according to trial civil procedure and the laws in their jurisdiction.

It isn't dirty, if the judge permits it to be done or said. A trial is very civilized, organized, and polished. It isn't what is portrayed on television or in the movies. Attorneys don't approach the jury, the witnesses, or the bench without first seeking permission.

Gossip, innuendo, and scurrilous accusations aren't tolerated.

Last, but not least, you've received several answers not to your liking. Before this thread spirals hopelessly out of control, I'm closing it. Good bye.

 

[cbg]

When you say that he's been advised by an attorney, it is reasonable to take from that, that he has hired an attorney. So please keep your "reading comprehension problems" to yourself.