Plaintiff Vs D'Argent Franchising LLC, D'Argent Construction LLC, D'Argent Companies LLC, Justin Giallonardo and XYZ Insurance Co.

Case 1:21-cv-00017-DCJ-JPM Document 1 Filed 01/06/21 Page 1 of 37 PageID #: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
____________________________________
)
)
)
Plaintiff, ) Docket No.
v. )
)
D’ARGENT FRANCHISING, LLC, )
D’ARGENT CONSTRUCTION, LLC, )
D’ARGENT COMPANIES, LLC, )
JUSTIN GIALLONARDO, and )
XYZ INSURANCE CO. )
)
Defendants. )
______________________________________)
COMPLAINT
1. Plaintiff worked at a Huddle House restaurant owned by the
D’Argent Companies. She worked as a server and was in training for a management position.
2. Unfortunately for she became the object of attention one of the
managers and owners of the D’Argent Companies, Justin Giallonardo,
3. Justin Giallonardo engaged in a pattern of sexual harassment towards
The harassment involved requests for dates, inappropriate nicknames and text
messages, sexual overtures, and threats to keep the communications secret.
4. The harassment culminated in Mr. Giallonardo tricking into coming
over to his house one night for a “barbeque” for prospective managers - that no one else was
invited to.
5. At the fake barbeque, Mr. Giallonardo tried to have sex with
6. declined to have sex with Mr. Giallonardo.
7. Afterwards, Mr. Giallonardo told supervisor that:
“If I can’t fuck that girl, I’m going to fire her.”
Page 1 of 37
8. supervisor told her she was going to be fired.
9. quit to avoid a termination on her job record. Her resignation was
recorded and submitted to the Louisiana Workforce Commission.
10. But when Justin Giallonardo found out that had quit before he could
fire her, he was furious. In a final act of retaliation, he wrote up a new, fraudulent separation
notice and back-dated it to a few days before she quit.
11. Disturbingly, Mr. Giallonardo is D’Argent’s Head of Human Resources – and so
had nowhere to seek help from.
12. claims are highly credible. As detailed herein, they are
corroborated by documentary evidence, audio recordings, social media evidence, and interviews
with nearly a dozen former employees of the D’Argent Companies and other witnesses.
13. Every single one of those witnesses corroborated the pattern of sexual harassment
that experienced.
14. The witnesses described a consistent pattern – Justin Giallonardo repeatedly hired
young women and then sexually harassed them until either (1) the women complained or rejected
his sexual advances and were fired; or (2) the harassment reached a point where the female
employees could take no more and quit.
15. This is intolerable. It is legally forbidden and morally wrong.
16. D’Argent’s pattern of sexual harassment and retaliation ends here.
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
17. Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and other
statutes. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question). Plaintiff further invokes the
supplemental jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 to hear claims arising under
state law.
Page 2 of 37
18. Venue in this Court is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 as a substantial part of
the events giving rise to Plaintiffs’ claims arose in the Western District of Louisiana, and because
Defendants reside in the District.
II. PARTIES
Plaintiff
19. Plaintiff is an adult citizen of the State of Louisiana and
domiciled in the Western District of Louisiana. She worked at a Huddle House franchise owned
by D’Argent Franchising, LLC, one segment of the integrated enterprise known as the “D’Argent
Companies.”
Defendants
20. Defendant D’Argent Franchising, LLC is a Louisiana licensed Limited Liability
Company, Charter No. 42412715K. Its principal place of business and headquarters are in
Alexandria, LA. It is a part of the D’Argent Companies integrated enterprise.
21. Defendant D’Argent Construction, LLC is a Louisiana licensed Limited Liability
Company, Charter No. 35991917K. It was formerly known as Thomas Giallonardo, L.L.C. Its
principal place of business and headquarters are in Alexandria, LA. It is a part of the D’Argent
Companies integrated enterprise.
22. Defendant D’Argent Companies, LLC is a Louisiana licensed Limited Liability
Company, Charter No. 35787008K. Until February 2019, it was called D’Argent Development,
LLC. Its principal place of business and headquarters are in Alexandria, LA. It is a part of the
D’Argent Companies integrated enterprise.
23. D’Argent Franchising, LLC, Defendant D’Argent Construction, LLC, and
D’Argent Companies, LLC (together, the “LLC Defendants”) are parts of an integrated
enterprise known as the D’Argent Companies (or “D’Argent”).
Page 3 of 37
24. At all relevant times D’Argent Franchising, LLC and the D’Argent Companies
integrated enterprise continuously had at least 20 employees, and thus constituted “employers” in
the meaning of Title VII and the LEDL. They are also employers engaged in an industry
affecting commerce within the meaning of Title VII.
25. Defendant Justin Giallonardo is a person of the full age of majority maintaining a
residence in the Western District of Louisiana. He is a manager, officer, director, and part owner
of the LLC Defendants. Upon information and belief, he exercised operational control over
significant aspects of the corporate Defendants’ day-today functions.
26. Defendants XYZ Insurance Companies 1-10 are not-yet-identified insurance
companies that hold policies that cover any or all of the co-Defendants for their actions alleged
herein.
27. Except as otherwise indicated, each defendant is a joint tortfeasor with every
other defendant under Louisiana Civil Code Art. 2324.
III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. Justin Giallonardo repeatedly sexually harassed and tricked her into

coming to his house in an effort to cause her to have sex with him.
28. worked at a Huddle House restaurant franchise owned by D’Argent
Companies from April 2019 to August 2020.
29. She worked as a server and was in training for a management position.
30. She reported to a head manager (known herein as “Manager # 1”) who reported
directly to Justin Giallonardo, the President of Business Development and Head of Human
Resources for D’Argent Companies.
31. While working for D’Argent’s Huddle House franchise, was subject
to a pervasive pattern of unwelcome romantic and sexual advances and physical contact.
Page 4 of 37
32. This harassment came primarily from Justin Giallonardo.
33. Prior to initiating sexual overtures with Justin Giallonardo asked #
1 if he could date her.
34. Specifically, Giallonardo came into Manager # 1’s office and said “I’m gonna try
to fuck
35. Manager # 1 responded “That’s not cool, dude, that’s my employee, I’m training
her to be a manager.” Giallonardo said “Naw, I’m going to try to take her out.” Manager # 1 said
“You’re a boss, you can’t do that.”
36. Giallonardo responded “I can do whatever I want to.”
37. Manager # 2, another manager of a D’Argent restaurant franchise, reports a similar
event. On a particular day, Manager # 2 met with Justin at the Huddle House. Justin asked, out of
the blue “What do you think about
38. Manager # 2 asked what he meant, and Justin indicated he was interested in
employee Manager # 2 thought it was a joke, because it was so obviously
wrong for a boss to date a subordinate.
39. But it was not a joke. Mr. Giallonardo began dropping by the Huddle House
franchise while was working in an effort to strike up a relationship with her.
40. During these visits he would engage in flirtatious conversation with
ask her out on dates, and regularly try to hug her, despite her demonstrated discomfort with this
contact.
41. Manager # 1 describes Justin Giallonardo frequently dropping by the restaurant and
saying “come here sweetie,” “you’re so pretty,” “I’ll buy you whatever you want, just be with me”
to
Page 5 of 37
42. Manager # 2 witnessed Justin Giallonardo being inappropriate with
describing the date he wanted to take her on – “I would take you out on the lake, buy you a steak
dinner,” etc.
43. On one occasion, Justin Giallonardo said to Manager # 1 “I’m gonna get that ass
one day,” referring to
44. Mr. Giallonardo also used flirtatious and unprofessional nicknames to refer to
At work and in text messages, he called her nicknames including “punkin,” “doodle
bug,” “little lady,” and “gal.” In a text message to he specified that “punkin” was
his way of referring to “Justin’s
45. Mr. Giallonardo also engaged in unwanted sexual advances via phone calls and text
messages outside of work. In text messages, Mr. Giallonardo regularly asked when
she was free to go on a “dinner date” with him. See, e.g.:
Page 6 of 37
46. repeatedly rebuffed these advances. Because Mr. Giallonardo was
her boss’s boss, she tried to do so gently, telling Mr. Giallonardo she had to work or didn’t know
her schedule.
47. Nonetheless, Mr. Giallonardo persisted in asking her out.
48. He also made repeated invitations to to come to his home, which she
initially declined via text message, insisting she had to work.
49. Mr. Giallonardo indicated he knew his behavior towards was
improper through his insistence that she keep their communications secret.
50. Shortly after they began communicating via text message, Mr. Giallonardo
contacted from a new phone number. He informed her “This is my real #. Use this
one from now on. Deal?”
51. When she asked why he has two phones, he responded that he had a “public # and
private.”
52. In another text message, Mr. Giallonardo told “We have a few things
to chat about before things can proceed. . . I have an extremely private life and I’m sure you can
respect that.”
53. He told her not to tell anyone about their interactions, and also instructed her to
delete text messages he sent her. He followed up on these demands via text message, asking “How
you doing keeping this private?”
54. These communications contributed to discomfort and were designed
to discourage her from reporting the inappropriate behavior.
55. Manager # 1 asked Giallonardo to stop harassing Giallonardo
responded “She’s my employee, I do what I want to.”
Page 7 of 37
56. After rejected his advances on multiple occasions via text message,
Mr. Giallonardo said “I will just have to come to Huddle to see yah.”
57. Giallonardo told Manager # 1 “If I can’t fuck that girl, I’m going to fire her.”
58. Manager # 1’s testimony is recorded in a sworn statement, attached to this
Complaint and incorporated herein by reference.
59. He also expressed his frustration with her repeated rejections by texting
: “I give up.”
60. However, Mr. Giallonardo did not give up.
61. In late November 2019, after had rejected Mr. Giallonardo’s requests
for dates on multiple occasions, he invited to his home under the guise of hosting a
“barbeque” for her as a prospective manager.
62. When arrived, however, she was alone with Mr. Giallonardo.
63. Mr. Giallonardo had not invited anyone else to the fake “barbeque.”
64. sat on a table while Mr. Giallonardo sat on the couch watching
television. Mr. Giallonardo commented on the fact she was sitting so far from him and tried to
convince her to sit closer to him.
65. After she moved closer to him, Mr. Giallonardo pressured her to engage in physical
contact by telling her to put her head on his chest and tried to grab her leg to pull her closer to him.
declined, and Mr. Giallonardo pressured her, saying “all the girls” like to “lay on
him.” She said no again, specifically pointing out that he was her “boss.”
66. was uncomfortable and fearful during the interaction. She felt
pressured due to Mr. Giallonardo’s position of authority over her professionally. But Mr.
Giallonardo made it intolerable and so she left.
Page 8 of 37
67. After left the residence, she met with Manager # 1 about the incident
and shared her distress about the situation.
68. Manager # 1 reports that the day that rejected Giallonardo’s
advances, she was extremely upset, shaking, and saying “I can’t believe he did this.”
69. Manager # 1 said that “If you had seen her face when she got back [from being at
Giallonardo’s house], you’d think she’d been raped.”
70. On December 2, 2019, soon after the incident at Mr. Giallonardo’s home,
reiterated via text message to Mr. Giallonardo that she was not open to a relationship.
C. After rejected Justin Giallonardo’s advances, he said he was going to

fire her. When she quit to avoid termination, he falsified paperwork to make it look
like she had been fired for cause.
71. Prior to December 2, 2019, received only positive feedback on her
job performance. Mr. Giallonardo would regularly tell she was doing an excellent
job, even sending her a text message stating: “Good job. You are doing great with that.”
72. On December 2, 2019, sent Mr. Giallonardo the text message clearly
indicating that she was not open to a relationship.
73. After that, Justin Giallonardo dramatically changed his treatment of
74. He claimed that was conducting the count of cash incorrectly and
made other complaints about her job performance to the head manager at Huddle House.
75. Mr. Giallonardo was looking for an excuse to fire in retaliation for
her rejection of his advances.
76. This is corroborated by Manager # 1, who reports that “ever since that day” that
rejected Giallonardo’s advances, Giallonardo would make repeated complaints
about her.
Page 9 of 37
77. Manager # 1 asked Giallonardo, “Is not doing things right because she
isn’t doing things right, or because she wouldn’t have sex with you?”
78. Giallonardo did not answer.
79. For months after December 2, 2019, Justin Giallonardo suggested to Manager # 1
that he fire Manager # 1 declined.
80. Finally, on Friday, August 14, 2020, Giallonardo made it an order – he directed
Manager # 1 to fire
81. Manger # 1 told Justin that he needed for the weekend, and if Justin
wanted to fire her, he’d have to do it himself on Monday.
82. Manager # 1 then told that she was going to be fired the next week.
83. then resigned to avoid having a termination on her job record.
84. She resigned on Sunday, August 16, 2020, as shown on her separation notice as
written up by Manager # 2. That notice is shown below as Fig. 1.
Page 10 of 37
Fig. 1: separation notice showing that she quit.
Page 11 of 37
85. The separation notice was submitted to the Louisiana Workforce Commission on
August 18, 2020 at 1:40:03 p.m.
86. When Justin Giallonardo found out that had quit before he could fire
her, he was furious.
87. So he engaged in one last act of retaliation towards
88. He wrote up a new separation notice in which was fired, and directed
Manager # 2 to sign it.
89. He then back-dated the new, fraudulent separation notice to August 15, 2020.
Page 12 of 37
Fig. 2: The fraudulent, back-dated separation notice in which Justin “fired”
Page 13 of 37
A. D’Argent’s managers repeatedly engage in sexual harassment of female employees.
90. D’Argent has a pattern of repeatedly sexually harassing its female employees.
91. Specifically, D’Argent’s human resources manager Justin Giallonardo has
repeatedly hired young women and then sexually harassed them until either (1) the women
complained or rejected his sexual advances and were fired; or (2) the harassment reached a point
where the female employees could take no more and quit.
92. was one of the young women subject to this pattern of harassment.
93. The pattern of harassment described below corroborates allegations
and makes them more plausible.
94. That pattern is described by former D’Argent employees as follows:
95. H.R. Assistant # 1, a former D’Argent employee, reports that Justin Giallonardo
would make comments about her relationship and sexual activity. For example, at one point in
December 2019, she described what she bought her husband for Christmas. Mr. Giallonardo
responded that a gift was unnecessary, and instead she should “get a nice outfit and be available
whenever [her husband] wants, to suck his dick on the couch.”
96. Mr. Giallonardo suggested that he thought H.R. Assistant # 1 would be good at oral
sex.
97. Justin Giallonardo would talk to H.R. Assistant # 1 about his sexual encounters. He
told her that he had had sex with one of the company’s vendors, but he wouldn’t do it again because
she had a “hairy pussy.”
98. He would describe sex with his ex-wife, and said that “she was like a bunny, she’d
always hop on me.”
99. He would describe to H.R. Assistant # 1 how he “fucked these whores,” by which
he meant the women he had sex with in general.
Page 14 of 37
100. Justin Giallonardo would make comments and hand gestures about H.R. Assistant
# 1’s body.
101. For example, he asked her if she had ever had a “stalker.” After she described an
example of unwelcome attention, he asked “did you have the figure you have now back then” and
then motioned to his chest, waist, and buttocks to describe those parts of her body.
102. Giallonardo told H.R. Assistant # 1 that he was disgusted by her tattoos, that
“women down here [in the South] don’t do that.”
103. He also asked H.R. Assistant # 1 to comment about his body. He asked what H.R.
Assistant # 1 thought of his feet, and asked if she had a “foot fetish.”
104. He would wear loose basketball shorts, and tell her that he was “freeballing,” and
asked her and another female employee if they thought “the hoes would like it.”
105. He would say his penis “has a mind of its own.”
106. Justin Giallonardo would direct sexually suggestive and romantic comments
specifically at H.R. Assistant # 1. For example, he said that if the world was ending, he would
choose H.R. Assistant # 1 to procreate with.
107. On at least one occasion, Justin Giallonardo touched H.R. Assistant # 1’s buttocks
with his hand, but tried to disguise it as an accident.
108. On a near-daily basis he would ask about H.R. Assistant # 1’s female friends to
determine whether they might fit his “requirements” for a sexual or romantic partner.
109. He particularly asked about one of H.R. Assistant # 1’s friends, who is a gay
woman. He would ask if she was “still a lesbian” and ask questions about how she “scissored.”
110. He asked if H.R. Assistant # 1 had ever had sex with a woman, because she seemed
like the kind of woman “who would do stuff like that.”
Page 15 of 37
111. At one point, Mr. Giallonardo told H.R. Assistant # 1that he had watched “lesbian
porn” over the weekend expressed his opinion that H.R. Assistant # 1’s friend “hasn’t had the right
dick yet.” He also asked what kind of pornography H.R. Assistant # 1 enjoyed.
112. He would also talk to H.R. Assistant # 1 about his assessment of the other female
employees in the office, and how they did or did not meet his “requirements.” One employee he
said fit his “southern woman” criteria because she looks to cook and clean, but would not fit his
requirements because she was overweight.
113. Mr. Giallonardo also critiqued H.R. Assistant # 1 for her compliance with his
“requirements.” He told her that “figure wise, you meet the criteria,” but told her that she didn’t
meet other criteria because she was “not the type of woman to be submissive,” and because she
didn’t want to be a stay-at-home mother.
114. Justin Giallonardo engaged H.R. Assistant # 1 in a conversation about how “racism
and sexism aren’t a thing anymore.” He said “so you think you should get a promotion after taking
maternity leave, while Sarah or Kyle have been here working their asses off. It was your choice to
have the baby.” H.R. Assistant # 1 pointed out that in some cases, a doctor orders bedrest and
leave. Mr. Giallonardo responded: the “doctor doesn’t sign your paychecks – I do.” She said that
he’d have to follow the federal law. He said “federal doesn’t sign your paychecks.”
115. Mr. Giallonardo also expressed his opinion that if a woman got pregnant, she
shouldn’t “take maternity leave” – instead, she should “stay home, and take care of her husband.”
116. When H.R. Assistant # 1 complained about Mr. Giallonardo’s inappropriate
behavior, he would get angry and punish her by chastising her work, and making her do punitive
repetitive tasks – like forwarding her emails and telling her to unsubscribe from them. He also
retaliated against her by talking negatively about her to other leadership.
Page 16 of 37
117. The sexual harassment against H.R. Assistant # 1 was often intertwined with racial
slurs and unwelcome comments about H.R. Assistant # 1’s race.
118. H.R. Assistant # 1 is Hispanic. Mr. Giallonardo would often refer to H.R. Assistant
# 1 as a “wetback,” and suggested that H.R. Assistant # 1’s secondary sexual characteristics (such
as her breasts and buttocks) were the result of her racial background.
119. For example, Mr. Giallonardo pointed to a picture of white women in Hooters
photo, and told H.R. Assistant # 1 “Don’t be racist and make these girls feel bad because they’re
not as privileged as you; you’d have no problem working at Hooters whatsoever.”
120. H.R. Assistant # 1 also observed sexism was also reflected in the other leadership
of the company.
121. For example, Thomas Giallonardo III, the owner and CEO of D’Argent Company,
asked H.R. Assistant # 1 to find an accounting intern. He told her to look for either a person with
business finance experience or an accountant. He said, “I’d prefer a man, because they are better
at numbers. But if it’s an accountant, I’d prefer a woman because they are better at organizing.”
H.R. Assistant # 1 found a Black woman with a Masters Degree in business finance, who was a
Ph.D. doctoral candidate, and brought her in for an interview. Thomas Giallonardo told H.R.
Assistant # 1 that he wouldn’t hire the woman because “this girl just has a degree in business.”
122. Receptionist # 1, a former D’Argent employee, also describes a pattern of sexual
harassment by Justin Giallonardo and CEO Thomas Giallonardo.
123. Justin Giallonardo questioned Receptionist # 1 about her sexual habits and
preferences, and speculated about her sexual history.
124. In particular, Mr. Giallonardo commented several times that “he could tell”
Receptionist # 1 “had been abused sexually as a child,” that she probably “liked certain sexual
kinks,” and “was probably into older men, and probably liked to be choked or slapped in bed.” In
Page 17 of 37
response Receptionist # 1 tried to change the subject, and told him that is “not something people
want to talk about.”
125. Justin Giallonardo made inappropriate comments about Receptionist # 1’s physical
appearance. On at least one occasion he said: “Completely off record, that shirt looks good on
your chest.”
126. Justin Giallonardo would also commonly talk about his own sex life to Receptionist
# 1. He would share unsolicited details of when he had sex and specific sex acts he engaged in.
He would also tell Receptionist # 1 and other female employees about occasions when he cheated
on a girlfriend.
127. Justin Giallonardo also engaged in physical activity that made Receptionist # 1 feel
uncomfortable. Specifically, Mr. Giallonardo would regularly urinate in an open courtyard located
within view of office windows during business hours. This conduct was visible to individuals
inside the office. Mr. Giallonardo said he knew people could see him urinating but he didn’t care.
128. CEO Thomas Giallonardo, III used the office for inappropriate personal purposes.
129. He routinely slept at the office and allowed his girlfriend to sleep there with him.
130. Both he and his girlfriend would be around Receptionist # 1 and other employees
while partially dressed or wearing only underwear.
131. On occasion, Thomas Giallonardo required Receptionist # 1 to wash bedsheets
stained with sexual fluids after he had slept in them at the office.
132. Receptionist # 1 heard the Giallonardos repeatedly joke about Thomas
Giallonardo’s girlfriend as “the handbag” because she had been “passed around” between
the Giallonardos.
Page 18 of 37
133. Several times, Justin Giallonardo asked Receptionist # 1 when she was going to
“fuck” his cousin Joey (a former D’Argent employee). He would do a hand motion to simulate sex
when he said this.
134. Justin Giallonardo told other employees, falsely, that Receptionist # 1and Joey had
had sex.
135. Justin Giallonardo on approximately a weekly basis would ask Receptionist # 1 to
go work as a stripper for D’Argent’s former employee Gary Archer.
136. Justin proposed that he would keep a “cut” of any money Receptionist # 1 earned
in that manner. Justin would suggest that because Receptionist # 1 was “plus sized” and a “southern
belle” would be a “fetish” and get more money.
137. Receptionist # 1 would repeatedly say she was “not going to do that” because she
was a mother and a Pentecostal – but Justin would still push her.
138. On other occasions, Roland Giallonardo, a former employee of D’Argent
Companies, engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior with female employees including
Receptionist # 1. Roland Giallonardo, an uncle of Justin Giallonardo, would frequently come to
the office and unsolicitedly rub the backs, shoulders, and necks of female employees. Roland
Giallonardo engaged in this behavior with Receptionist # 1. D’Argent’s management allowed this
to occur.
139. The impact of all this behavior was exacerbated by the fact that Justin Giallonardo
was the head of Human Resources – and so the women at D’Argent had nowhere to turn for help.
140. Receptionist # 1 took an HR class with Mr. Giallonardo, and after the class
reminded she him that using profane language can be a form of sexual harassment.
Page 19 of 37
141. Mr. Giallonardo dismissed her concerns, stating “it doesn’t matter because we are
a small company,” suggesting that he understood the requirements of anti-discrimination law but
believed the law did not apply to D’Argent.
142. Justin Giallonardo was aware that this conduct was in direct conflict with his role
as Head of Human Resources.
143. He would frequently say “this isn’t HR but…”
144. By saying “this isn’t HR but,” Mr. Giallonardo meant that he was aware that what
he was saying was not appropriate.
145. Justin Giallonardo also mandated that both H.R. Assistant # 1 and Receptionist #
1, along with the other women in the office (and only the women in the office), participate in the
process of finding him sexual partners.
146. On one of her first days on the job, Mr. Giallonardo handed H.R. Assistant # 1 a
document entitled “Requirements for Wife.” (A copy is attached here as Figure 3.)
147. He explained that “now that you’re working here, these are my requirements for a
wife. I want you to help me find her. . . . She has to fit a majority of these requirements. I don’t
care if she is a military spouse with kids, so long as her spouse has to be out of the picture.” He
told her that “whenever an opportunity crosses your mind, tell me immediately.”
Page 20 of 37
Figure 3: Justin Giallonardo’s “Requirements for Wife”
Page 21 of 37
148. Administrative Assistant # 1 was a female D’Argent employee who worked as
Thomas Giallonardo’s personal assistant for six months.
149. She heard Thomas Giallonardo bragging about sexual conduct with an underage
girl, was exposed to Justin Giallonardo’s written sexual fantasies about co-workers, was asked to
find paid sexual partners for Thomas Giallonardo.
150. In one meeting with a potential client, Administrative Assistant # 1 had to listen to
Thomas Giallonardo tell the potential client how he had “got a 15-year-old girl to suck his ass
when he was in the Dominican [Republic].”
151. On one business trip, Thomas Giallonardo asked Administrative Assistant # 1 to
procure “sugar babies” – i.e., women who would have sex for compensation – on the website
Seeking.com, which describes itself as “The Official Sugar Daddy Site.”
152. Administrative Assistant # 1 described a document in which Justin Giallonardo
recorded “the sexual fantasies about the people who work” for D’Argent.
153. The document was stored on a D’Argent company server.
154. This document, for example, recorded that Justin Giallonardo thought H.R.
Assistant # 1’s “tits look great” and gave him an erection.
155. Justin Giallonardo once told Administrative Assistant # 1 that a “true man” would
want a woman he could “control,” and indicated that the best person to control is a woman who is
like a “child.”
156. Accountant # 1 was a female employee who worked at D’Argent for a year and a
half.
157. On her first day, Tom Giallonardo told her to “move her bony ass.” When
Accountant # 1 expressed that it was inappropriate, Tom just laughed.
Page 22 of 37
158. She also says that Tom frequently says “kiss my pussy” instead of the phrase “my
mistake.”
159. She was also given the “Requirements for a Wife” list by Justin Giallonardo. He
walked into her office and said “since I’m single here is a list of what I’m looking for.”
160. Her boyfriend came to the office and Justin took him in another room and showed
him pornography of a woman using strap-on dildo on a man, asked if he thought it was “gay.”
161. She corroborates that she would see Justin peeing outside “daily.”
162. Accountant # 1 told Justin multiple times he was inappropriate but he would not
change his behavior.
163. Admin Assistant # 2 was a female employee who worked at D’Argent for six
months.
164. On her first day, she was asked to wash Tom Giallonardo’s underwear and dirty
sheets.
165. She recalls that Justin Giallonardo would say terrible things about his girlfriend,
how he “just had her for the sex.” One time, when Justin’s girlfriend was on the news, he told
Admin Assistant # 2 “I’m hitting that.”
166. Justin Giallonardo would describe to her the “bitches” he had lined up to date.
167. She corroborates seeing Justin go outside to urinate, and also other executives do
the same on a particular plant. Then they brought the plant inside. It was leaking with urine, and
Admin Assistant # 1 was told to clean it up.
168. Thomas had Admin Assistant # 2 pick out gifts for his girlfriend and mistress.
169. Thomas had her book him a vacation, and had her asked about the nudity policy.
170. She frequently heard Tom Giallonardo say “kiss my pussy.”
Page 23 of 37
171. On several occasions Admin Assistant # 2 saw pornography on Tom Giallonardo’s
phone and office computer. She reported the incident to a human resources liason (Marketing
Employee # 1). Shortly thereafter, she was fired.
172. Marketing Employee # 1 was a female employee who worked directly under
Justin Giallonardo in human resources. She worked with him for approximately two years.
173. Marketing Employee # 1 also worked as a human resources liaison. In that capacity,
two female employees came to her with complaints, one regarding a franchisee outside the office,
the other who said Thomas Giallonardo showed her pornography on his computer.
174. The employee who was shown pornography was fired a week later after she
complained about the conduct to Marketing Employee # 1.
175. Marketing Employee # 1 recalls Justin talking about his sex life with his girlfriend
176. Marketing Employee # 1 recalls Justin printing the “list of qualities” and giving it
to her sometime in 2017 or 2018, and asking her to keep an eye out for women meeting the criteria.
She told him it was inappropriate.
177. She recalls going to a conference with Justin and Tom. Justin brought his girlfriend
and would describe to Marketing Employee # 1 the specific sexual acts he were doing in his hotel
room (throwing his girlfriend up against wall, floor, pulling her hair, etc.) and asked Marketing
Employee # 1 if she could hear them.
178. Marketing Employee # 1 witnessed and experienced Roland Giallonardo coming
to the office and rubbing the shoulders of female employees. She confirms it was unwanted.
179. She would frequently tell Justin he was going to get sued, he would laugh or tell
her “what happened at D’Argent stays at D’Argent.” Another time she told him “y’all are gonna
get your ass sued.” Justin Giallonardo responded “I wish people would stop saying that.”
Page 24 of 37
180. Manager # 1 is a former male employee who was a manager of one of the D’Argent
restaurants for approximately two years.
181. He witnessed Justin Giallonardo point to a female blonde employee and say “I’m
going to fuck that bitch” within earshot of the female employee. She turned around in shock.
182. He witnessed Justin and Thomas Giallonardo walk around the office in boxer
shorts, more than once.
183. He witnessed Justin Giallonardo say about a female employee “somebody better
help her fat ass lose weight.”
184. He witnessed Justin Giallonardo rubbing his genitals while looking at Receptionist
# 1.
185. Manager # 2 is a former male employee who was a manager of the D’Argent
restaurants.
186. He said Justin would watch the female employees on their security camera system,
and make “lewd comments.” Justin described one employee as a “worthless fat bitch,” described
another as “that’s a nice ass.” Justin would ask Manager # 2 if female employees were single.
187. He described Justin as going into “very explicit detail” about his sexual activities
with his girlfriend, who he called the “frog.”
188. He heard Justin call a female D’Argent employee a “cunt.”
189. He witnessed Justin talk to Receptionist # 1 inappropriately, describing a
hypothetical relationship between them “if it was me, I would take you out, I would buy you the
best things,” etc.
190. Manager # 2 would witness Thomas and Justin Giallonardo walk around in their
boxers at the office, during office hours, while female subordinates were present.
Page 25 of 37
191. Manager # 2 witnessed Justin Giallonardo peeing outside on the patio behind the
office, with his penis out and visible.
192. Justin Giallonardo gave a print-out of the “Requirements for a Wife” to Manager #
2’s fiancée, who was a female employee at another D’Argent franchise. He did not, however, give
a copy to Manager # 2.
193. Coordinator # 1 is a female employee who worked at D’Argent for several years.
She describes:
194. Her supervisor, Tommy Giallonardo (the son of Thomas Giallonardo) would
frequently make comments about her appearance. One time she apologized while wearing yoga
pants, and Tommy said “looking like that, you don’t need to apologize.”
195. Justin Giallonardo was always talking about “boobs and butts,” and would say
things to Coordinator # 1 like “you look so hot in that dress, could I pull it off?”
196. She heard Justin talk about tasting a female coworker’s breastmilk. He asked that
coworker “if it would be too much” if he asked to taste it.
197. Coordinator # 1 would tell him “Justin, we’re not talking about that, that’s not a
work conversation.” He would say “I’m HR and it’s okay.”
198. Coordinator # 1 reports that female employees were treated very differently than
male employees. The executives would ask the female employees to shop for clothes, or for shoes,
or birthday gifts, or wrap presents, or go grocery shopping. They would ask female employees to
use their personal lunch break to get food for the executives. When asked if male employees were
asked to perform similar tasks, Coordinator # 1 laughed and said “no, no.”
199. She had a female coworker come to her and describe how she had been called to
Tom Giallonardo’s office, and had seen pornography playing on his computer.
Page 26 of 37
IV. Causes of Action
Count One – Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act

(LLC Defendants)
200. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates each and every foregoing paragraph.
201. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act bars gender discrimination in the form of
workplace sexual harassment. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 701 et seq., as amended, 42 U.S.C. §
2000e et seq.
202. A hostile work environment resulting from sexual harassment is a kind of gender
discrimination that violates Title VII. Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 66, 106 S.
Ct. 2399, 2405, 91 L. Ed. 2d 49 (1986).
203. A prima facie case of hostile work environment requires: (a) the employee
belongs to a protected group, (b) the employee was subject to unwelcome sexual harassment, (c)
the harassment was based on sex, (d) the harassment affected a “term, condition, or privilege of
employment,” and (e) respondeat superior (i.e., the employer knew or should have known of the
harassment and failed to take remedial action). Jones v. Flagship Int'l, 793 F.2d 714, 719–20 (5th
Cir. 1986). Where the harasser is a supervisor, this last element can be eliminated. Watts v.
Kroger Co., 170 F.3d 505, 509 (5th Cir. 1999).
204. For behavior to be harassment, the conduct must be unwelcome “in the sense that
the employee did not solicit or incite it, and in the sense that the employee regarded the conduct
as undesirable or offensive.” EEOC Compl. Man. (CCH) P3114 (Mar. 19, 1990) (quoting
Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897, 903 (11th Cir. 1982). Sometimes behavior from the
plaintiff appears to welcome or encourage the harassment, when in fact that reciprocation of
sexual behavior was coerced. See Phillips v Smaelly Maintenance Serv., Inc. 711 F.2d 1524 (11th
Cir. 1983) (holding lower court correct to consider that the alleged harasser knew plaintiff
Page 27 of 37
needed job to make house payments and exploited her financial need to solicit sexual relations).
205. Harassment affects a “term, condition, or privilege of employment” when it is
“sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [the victim’s] employment and create
an abusive working environment.” Royal v. CCC & R Tres Arboles, L.L.C., 736 F.3d 396, 401
(5th Cir. 2013), quoting Harvill v. Westward Commc'ns, L.L.C., 433 F.3d 428, 434 (5th Cir.
2005) (quoting Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 67, 106 S. Ct. 2399, 91 L.Ed. 2d
49 (1986)). In Lauderdale v. Texas Dep’t of Criminal Justice, Institutional Div., the employee
had a viable hostile work environment due to the “frequency of unwanted attention,” where her
harasser repeatedly called her, asked to “snuggle,” and repeatedly asked to get coffee after work.
Lauderdale v. Texas Dep't of Criminal Justice, Institutional Div., 512 F.3d 157, 164 (5th Cir.
2007). The Fifth Circuit found that “[g]iven this pervasiveness, the level of severity necessary to
establish an altered work environment is diminished.” Id.
206. An employer make take advantage of an affirmative defense against sexual
harassment if it can show: “(a) that the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct
promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and (b) that the plaintiff employee unreasonably
failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer
or to avoid harm otherwise.” Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 807, 118 S. Ct.
2275, 2293, 141 L. Ed. 2d 662 (1998).
207. No affirmative defense is available, however, when the supervisor's harassment
culminates in a tangible employment action, such as discharge, demotion, or undesirable
reassignment. Id. at 2279. This is quid pro quo harassment, and results in strict liability for the
employer. See EEOC Enforcement Guidance, "Vicarious Employer Responsibility for Unlawful
Harassment by Supervisors" (June 18, 1999).
208. Title VII, specifically 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3 makes it unlawful for an employer to
Page 28 of 37
retaliate against an employee who has opposed an unlawful employment practice, or a practice
they reasonably believed to be unlawful.
209. Here, was in a protected class, as a woman.
210. Her harasser, Justin Giallonardo, was a supervisor. Specifically, he was
supervisor’s supervisor, and also a part owner of the business.
211. did not welcome the Justin Giallonardo’s behavior. She did her best
to deflect or ignore his behavior, often changing the topic.
212. Justin Giallonardo’s behavior went beyond merely “distasteful,” and included
explicit invitations to conduct sexual acts. See Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57
(1986). His behavior was offensive, severe, unwelcome, and pervasive.
213. The pervasiveness of the conduct created a hostile work environment that was
severe enough to affect the terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.
214. Defendants, through pervasive sexual harassment, created a hostile work
environment for
215. When they fired for refusing to acquiesce to sexual conduct,
Defendants committed quid pro quo sexual harassment and retaliation.
216. Defendants’ conduct was intentional and done with malice or with reckless
indifference to the federally-protected rights of
217. As D’Argent’s Human Resources officer, Justin Giallonardo was aware of the
requirements of federal law. He explicitly rejected those requirements as not applying to
D’Argent.
218. Defendants’ actions have caused to suffer mental, emotional and
psychological harm.
Page 29 of 37
219. suffered a loss of present and future wages, employment benefits,
and future career opportunities as a result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct.
220. On September 17, 2020, filed Charge of Discrimination No. 461-
2021-00031 with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
221. On December 18, 2020, was issued a Right to Sue Letter.
Count 2 - Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law

(LLC Defendants)
222. Plaintiff realleges and incorporate each and every foregoing paragraph.
223. La. R.S. 23:332(A)(1) makes it unlawful to discriminate against any individual in
employment based on their sex.
224. By the conduct alleged herein, Defendants subjected to gender
discrimination in the form of hostile workplace sexual harassment, quid pro quo sexual
harassment, and retaliation in violation of the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law.
Count Two – Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

(All Defendants)
225. Plaintiff realleges and incorporate each and every foregoing paragraph.
226. Intentional infliction of emotional distress is (a) intentional or reckless conduct
(b) which was extreme and outrageous; and (c) caused severe emotional distress to the plaintiff.
Mississippi recognizes such a cause of action even in the absence of physical injury. See Jones v.
Fluor Daniel Services Corp., 959 So. 2d 1044 (Miss. 2007); First Nat. Bank v. Langley, 314 So.
2d 324, 77 A.L.R.3d 570 (Miss. 1975).
227. Here, Defendants intentionally and recklessly sexually harassed and
retaliated against her when she refused to have sex with Justin Giallonardo.
228. Their pervasive lewd comments, requests, gifts, and solicitations were extreme
and outrageous.
Page 30 of 37
229. The final act of retaliation – fraudulently creating and backdating a termination
notice – served no purpose other than to cause distress to
230. suffered severe emotional distress as a result of Defendants’
behavior.
Count 3 – Intentional Spoliation and Witness Intimidation

(All Defendants)
231. A “state law tort claim for spoliation of evidence” exists when a “defendant
intentionally destroyed evidence.” Longwell v. Jefferson Par. Hosp. Ser. Dist., 970 So.2d 1100,
1104 (La. App. 2007).
232. Here, Defendants learned in 2020 that they were being investigated by counsel for
their employees.
233. Once they learned they were being investigated, Defendants engaged in a campaign
of spoliation of evidence and witness intimidation. Plaintiff has learned of three elements of this
campaign:
234. First, when Defendants found out an EEOC claim had been filed against them, they
began to change documents, memberships, and other items in an effort to make the various parts
of their integrated enterprise appear “separate” when they were not.
235. This is because Defendants have a rudimentary understanding that Title VII and
other federal statutes only apply to companies with more than fifteen employees.
236. So Justin Giallonardo called Manager # 1 and Manager # 2 into his office and said
“[Receptionist # 1] is suing us. . . What I need y’all to do is go to your computers and go into
Heartland [payroll system] and make everyone part time. The only full-time employees we need
to have is the managers. We have to make everything separate.”
237. Manager # 1 described Justin as treating this “like a 911 deal” – i.e., an emergency.
Page 31 of 37
Justin explained that it was because Receptionist # 1 was “coming after” him.
238. Manager # 1 reports that after that point Justin was “making everything separate.”
For example, Justin previously had “D’Argent Companies” Sam’s Club cards for the restaurant,
and after the EEOC charge, he changed it to “D’Argent Franchising.”
239. Second, Defendants engaged in deliberate witness tampering and spoliation of
evidence when they filed a police report and urged prosecution of witness Ricky Molina shortly
after finding out he was a witness against Defendants.
240. Specifically, on August 11, 2020, Justin Giallonardo and Manager # 2 had a
disagreement over money.
241. The disagreement was resolved, and on September 8, 2020, Manager # 2 was
promoted to general manager of the Huddle House franchise.
242. On September 23, 2020, Manager # 2 was fired.
243. On October 15, 2020, Manager # 2 was identified for the first time as a witness in
the potential legal proceedings against D'Argent, in a letter from Plaintiff’s counsel to D’Argent’s
counsel Jones Walker.
244. On information and belief, Jones Walker forwarded the letter to D’Argent
sometime in the next few days.
245. On October 22, 2020, having learned that Manager # 2 would be a witness against
them, D’Argent reported Manager # 2 to the police for felony theft.
246. D’Argent reported Manager # 2 to the police in an effort to intimidate him and chill
his testimony against D’Argent.
247. Third, Defendants destroyed evidence when they deleted the @LeroyGuillot
Twitter account after they received a preservation request that specifically requested preservation
of that Twitter account.
Page 32 of 37
248. The @LeroyGuillot Twitter account was used by CEO Thomas Giallonardo III to
complain about women, “blacks,” transgender persons (who he describes as men who have “cut
[their] goober off”), Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and other people and groups.
249. The @LeroyGuillot Twitter account was evidence relevant to this case because it
showed the attitude of D’Argent’s leadership towards women and gender, and because it reflects
D’Argent’s leadership’s understanding of “discrimination” and “bigotry.”
250. A few examples are as follows:
Page 33 of 37
251. Once a third party connected Mr. Giallonardo to the “Leroy Guillot” account, Mr.
Giallonardo made the Twitter account private, took his photo off of it, and changed his description
from “Just a Cajun boy from south Louisiana” to “Just a cowboy from Montana.”
252. After Thomas Giallonardo made the account private, Plaintiff’s counsel learned
about the account.
253. Because the account was private, Plaintiff’s counsel could not read any of the
account’s tweets on Twitter.
254. Plaintiff’s counsel could, however, see a small subset of the account’s tweets using
an internet archive service.
255. The small subset (including the images above) was enough to indicate that the
account was relevant evidence.
256. So on June 30, 2020, Plaintiff’s counsel sent a preservation letter to D’Argent Via
U.S. Mail, fax to 318.787.6726, and email to [email protected] and
[email protected].
257. The preservation letter specifically identified “All social media of all executives,
including but not limited to twitter.com/LeroyGuillot” as among the evidence that should be
preserved.
258. Despite having received the preservation notice, Defendants deleted the
@LeroyGuillot account.
259. This was done in an effort to spoliate evidence.
260. Spoliation and alteration of documents was a common business tactic by D’Argent.
Page 34 of 37
For example, Administrative Assistant # 1 reported that Thomas Giallonardo would brag that after
a commercial rental agreement was signed, he would go in and alter the rental price if he thought
the tenant hadn’t read it carefully enough to catch the alteration.
Count 4 – State Law Direct Action Claim

Against XYZ Insurance Companies
261. Plaintiffs incorporates and reasserts the allegations in each preceding and
following paragraphs of this Complaint.
262. Defendant ABC Insurance Companies, upon information and belief, have issued
and/or currently have in effect one or more policies of insurance covering one or more of the
Defendants named herein. For valuable consideration received, these policies obligated
Defendant Insurance Companies, jointly and/or severally, to pay on behalf of their insured
Defendant(s) any sums the insured Defendant(s) may become obligated to pay to Plaintiff or to
indemnify their insured Defendant(s) for any sums the insured Defendant(s) may become
obligated to pay to Plaintiff.
263. By reason of their illegal and unconstitutional acts, Defendants are liable to
Plaintiff for all damages and injuries they have suffered as a result. Upon information and belief,
Defendant Insurance Companies are contractually obligated to pay these sums on behalf of the
insured Defendant(s).
264. Upon information and belief, Defendant Insurance Companies are liable to
Plaintiff for any and all damages incurred by reason of the insured Defendant(s)’ acts, up to their
policy limits, notwithstanding the fact that the insured Defendant(s) may themselves be able to
assert claims of privilege or immunity from liability.
265. Under Louisiana Revised Statute § 22:655(B), Plaintiff brings a direct action
against Defendant Insurance Companies to recover any and all sums they are obligated to pay
Page 35 of 37
Plaintiffs on behalf of their insureds or to indemnify their insureds.
I. RELIEF REQUESTED
266. Wherefore Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants as follows:
(a) For a judgment against Defendants for all asserted causes of action;
(b) For a judgment awarding compensatory damages;
(c) For a judgment awarding special damages;
(d) For a judgment awarding Plaintiff her costs and attorney’s fees;
(e) For a judgment awarding pre- and post-judgment interest at the highest rates
allowed by law; and
(f) For all other and further relief as may be necessary and appropriate.
267. Plaintiff states any and all other causes of action that may become known through
a trial of this matter on its merits against any and all other parties which are herein named or which
may be added later, and request any and all other damages or remedies which this Court may seem
equitable.
268. Plaintiff reserves the right to notice of defect to this pleading and reserve the right
to amend or supplement this Petition after discovery of any additional fact, law, or claim, the
amendment of which to be performed by the filing of any subsequent pleading.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff respectfully requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
Respectfully Submitted:
LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM MOST
/s/ William Most

WILLIAM MOST (La. Bar No. 36914)
HOPE PHELPS (La. Bar No. 37259)
DAVID LANSER (La. Bar No. 37764)
201 St. Charles Ave., Ste. 114, # 101
Page 36 of 37
New Orleans, LA 70170

T: (504) 509-5023
Email:[email protected]
Counsel for Plaintiff
Page 37 of 37
Case 1:21-cv-00017-DCJ-JPMCIVIL
JS 44 (Rev. 10/20) COVER
Document SHEET
1-1 Filed 01/06/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 38
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS
D'Argent Franchising, LLC, D'Argent Construction, LLC,
D'Argent Companies, LLC, Justin Giallonardo
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Rapides County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Rapides
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Law Office of William Most, 201 St. Charles Ave., Ste. Matthew Popp and Mark Hill of Thompson Coe
114, # 101, New Orleans, LA 70170 (504) 509-5023 650 Poydras St., Suite 2105, New Orleans, LA 70130
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
1 U.S. Government ✖ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4
of Business In This State
2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act
120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment
150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking
151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation
Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR 880 Defend Trade Secrets 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards Act of 2016 (15 USC 1681 or 1692)
160 Stockholders’ Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 485 Telephone Consumer
190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management SOCIAL SECURITY Protection Act
195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV
196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/
362 Personal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
Medical Malpractice Leave Act 864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 790 Other Labor Litigation 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts
210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 791 Employee Retirement 893 Environmental Matters
220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act FEDERAL TAX SUITS 895 Freedom of Information
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment ✖ 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act
240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence or Defendant) 896 Arbitration
245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 871 IRS—Third Party 899 Administrative Procedure
290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION 26 USC 7609 Act/Review or Appeal of
Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application Agency Decision
446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration 950 Constitutionality of
Other 550 Civil Rights Actions State Statutes
448 Education 555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
1 Original 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.)
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Plaintiff was subjected to sexual harassment and retaliation by her employers.
VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: ✖ Yes No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE David C. Joseph DOCKET NUMBER 20-cv-01501-DCJ-JPM
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
1/5/2021 /s/ William Most
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-00017-DCJ-JPM Document 1-1 Filed 01/06/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 39
JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 10/20)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then
the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service.
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
Declaration of Wes Pigott
I, Wes Pigott, declare the following:
1. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated in this declaration and could
competently testify to the same if called upon to do so.
2. Until earlier this year, I worked for the D’Argent Companies. I worked there for
approximately two years.
3. I was the general manager of D’Argent’s Huddle House franchise, and I reported
to Justin Giallonardo.
A. I was instructed by Justin Giallonardo to delete any employee hours over

forty hours per week.
4. At Huddle House, employees would clock-in and clock-out using last four digits
of their social security number in an electronic time management system called “Aloha.”
5. Employees would frequently work more than forty hours in a week. But Justin
Giallonardo ordered told me to delete any employee time over forty hours per week, so as to
avoid paying any overtime.
6. Per his instructions, every two weeks I would use Aloha to call up a “payroll
report.” If any employee had worked more than forty hours per week, I would use the “edit
punch” functionality to reduce their hours to forty hours. I would then send the hours from Aloha
to the Heartland payroll system to be paid.
7. I thought this was wrong, and so one month I stopped doing it. Justin punished me
by deducting approximately $8,000 from my paychecks – which was the amount of the overtime
that I did not delete over a period of time.
8. I estimate that over the course of her work at Huddle House, I deleted in excess of
$10,000 of overtime for alone.
1
B. I was ordered by Justin Giallonardo to alter records in response to a EEOC charge.
9. One day this summer, Justin Giallonardo called me and another manager into his
office. He explained that D’Argent employee had filed a charge against D’Argent.
He explained “Alyssa is suing us. . . What I need y’all to do is go to your computers and go into
Heartland and make everyone part time. The only full-time employees we need to have is the
managers. We have to make everything separate.”
10. Justin treated this as an emergency task for us to immediately complete. He
explained that it was because “ was coming after him.”
11. After that point, Justin attempted to make the franchises separate from the other
D’Argent busiensses. For example, Justin previously had “D’Argent Companies” Sam’s Club
cards for the franchise restaurants, but after finding out about the EEOC charge, he changed it to
“D’Argent Franchising.”
C. Justin Giallonardo’s conduct regarding “If I can’t fuck that

girl, I’m going to fire her.”
12. One of the members of my team was She was a good worker,
and I was training her to be a manager.
13. One day Justin Giallonardo came into my office and asked if he could date
At first, I thought he was joking because that would be so inappropriate, considering
he was her boss. He became more explicit, and said “I’m gonna try to fuck I said “That’s
not cool, dude, that’s my employee, I’m training her to be a manager.” He said “Naw, I’m going
to try to take her out.”
14. After that, Justin began frequently dropping by Huddle House and saying things
to like, “come here sweetie,” “you’re so pretty,” “I’ll buy you whatever you want,
just be with me.”
15. During one of these visits, Justin told me “I’m gonna get that ass one day.”
2
16. I asked Justin to stop this conduct towards I explained, “you’re a
boss, you can’t do that.” He responded “I can do whatever I want to.”
17. This attention was unwelcome and unwanted by For example,
when Justin also bought her a gift certificate for a spa package, she said she did not want it and
gave it to me, to give to my daughter.
18. At another meeting in my office, Justin told me “If I can’t fuck that girl, I’m
going to fire her.” He was referring to
19. Eventually, Justin enticed to his home by saying he was going to
have a “family barbecue.“
20. I saw after she came back from the “barbecue.“ She explained that
there was no barbecue – it was just her and Justin, and that he had attemped to have sex with her
but she turned him down.
21. I could tell she was extremely upset because she was shaking and saying over and
over “I can’t believe he did this.” If someone had seen her behavior, they would think she had
been raped.
22. After rejected Justin‘s advances, Justin’s attitude towards her
completely changed. He began making repeated complaints about her to me, complaining about
her supposed “incompetence.“
23. Justin had never had any complaints about before she turned him
down for sex.
24. I asked Justin, “is not doing things right because she isn’t doing things
right, or because she wouldn’t have sex with you?” Justin would not answer me.
25. Justin began suggesting I fire I did not because she was a good
worker and had done nothing wrong.
26. Finally, on a Thursday, Justin gave me a direct order to fire I told
3
Justin that I needed her to work through the weekend, but if he was set on firing her, he could do
it himself on Monday.
27. I then told that Justin intended to fire her, and suggested she look
for another job. She did, and found another job. On Monday, she resigned because she knew
Justin was going to fire her.
28. Manager Ricky and I wrote up Ms. William’s separation paperwork as a
resignation.
29. But Justin overrode that and ordered Ricky to rewrite the paperwork as a
termination for cause.
30. I believe Justin did so in retaliation for not having sex with him,
because he wanted to have “the last word” with her.
31. Based on my observations of the difference between Justin’s attitude before and
after turned him down for sex, and based on my observations of difference
between Justin’s treatment of as opposed to other employees, It was clear to me
that Justin ordered me to fire because she had refused to have sex with him.
B. Justin Giallonardo’s Other Inappropriate Conduct.
32. I also witnessed Justin Giallonardo’s inappropriate conduct towards other
employees. For example, I witnessed Justin Giallonardo point to a female blonde employee and
say “I’m going to fuck that bitch” within earshot of the female employee. She turned around in
shock.
33. I witnessed Justin and Thomas Giallonardo walk around the office in boxer
shorts, more than once.
34. I witnessed Justin Giallonardo say about a female employee “somebody better
help her fat ass lose weight.”
35. I witnessed Justin Giallonardo rubbing his genitals while looking at female
4
employee .
36. I heard Justin Giallonardo refer to , a Hispanic employee,
and another Hispanic employee as “wetbacks.” Once I heard Justin Giallonardo say “I can’t get
this wetback to do nothing” regarding .
37. I heard Justin use “cunt” as a frequent nickname for employee .
38. I heard Justin explain how “dead people are still working.” Based on context and
other things I had heard, I understood that to mean that D’Argent was using the social security
numbers of dead people to knowingly allow undocumented persons to work.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
____________________ Date: ___________

Wes Pigott

Plaintiff Vs D'Argent Franchising LLC, D'Argent Construction LLC, D'Argent Companies LLC, Justin Giallonardo and XYZ Insurance Co.

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

Plaintiff Vs D'Argent Franchising LLC, D'Argent Construction LLC, D'Argent Companies LLC, Justin Giallonardo and XYZ Insurance Co.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:21-cv-00017-DCJ-JPM Document 1 Filed 01/06/21 Page 1 of 37 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1. Plaintiff worked at a Huddle House restaurant owned by the

2. Unfortunately for she became the object of attention one of the

managers and owners of the D’Argent Companies, Justin Giallonardo,

3. Justin Giallonardo engaged in a pattern of sexual harassment towards

messages, sexual overtures, and threats to keep the communications secret.

4. The harassment culminated in Mr. Giallonardo tricking into coming

5. At the fake barbeque, Mr. Giallonardo tried to have sex with

6. declined to have sex with Mr. Giallonardo.

7. Afterwards, Mr. Giallonardo told supervisor that:

“If I can’t fuck that girl, I’m going to fire her.”

8. supervisor told her she was going to be fired.

9. quit to avoid a termination on her job record. Her resignation was

recorded and submitted to the Louisiana Workforce Commission.

notice and back-dated it to a few days before she quit.

11. Disturbingly, Mr. Giallonardo is D’Argent’s Head of Human Resources – and so

had nowhere to seek help from.

12. claims are highly credible. As detailed herein, they are

employees could take no more and quit.

15. This is intolerable. It is legally forbidden and morally wrong.

16. D’Argent’s pattern of sexual harassment and retaliation ends here.

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Defendants reside in the District.

19. Plaintiff is an adult citizen of the State of Louisiana and

20. Defendant D’Argent Franchising, LLC is a Louisiana licensed Limited Liability

Alexandria, LA. It is a part of the D’Argent Companies integrated enterprise.

21. Defendant D’Argent Construction, LLC is a Louisiana licensed Limited Liability

Companies integrated enterprise.

22. Defendant D’Argent Companies, LLC is a Louisiana licensed Limited Liability

D’Argent Companies integrated enterprise.

23. D’Argent Franchising, LLC, Defendant D’Argent Construction, LLC, and

enterprise known as the D’Argent Companies (or “D’Argent”).

affecting commerce within the meaning of Title VII.

significant aspects of the corporate Defendants’ day-today functions.

26. Defendants XYZ Insurance Companies 1-10 are not-yet-identified insurance

other defendant under Louisiana Civil Code Art. 2324.

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. Justin Giallonardo repeatedly sexually harassed and tricked her into

28. worked at a Huddle House restaurant franchise owned by D’Argent

Companies from April 2019 to August 2020.

Resources for D’Argent Companies.

32. This harassment came primarily from Justin Giallonardo.

33. Prior to initiating sexual overtures with Justin Giallonardo asked #

1 if he could date her.

“You’re a boss, you can’t do that.”

36. Giallonardo responded “I can do whatever I want to.”

37. Manager # 2, another manager of a D’Argent restaurant franchise, reports a similar

the blue “What do you think about

employee Manager # 2 thought it was a joke, because it was so obviously

wrong for a boss to date a subordinate.

franchise while was working in an effort to strike up a relationship with her.

40. During these visits he would engage in flirtatious conversation with

42. Manager # 2 witnessed Justin Giallonardo being inappropriate with

one day,” referring to

his way of referring to “Justin’s

she was free to go on a “dinner date” with him. See, e.g.:

46. repeatedly rebuffed these advances. Because Mr. Giallonardo was

47. Nonetheless, Mr. Giallonardo persisted in asking her out.

initially declined via text message, insisting she had to work.

49. Mr. Giallonardo indicated he knew his behavior towards was

one from now on. Deal?”

you doing keeping this private?”