MAISY DOE, a minor by and through her Guardian ad Litem, KAREN DOE, Plaintiff, vs. EMERY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, DANIEL PARHAM and ROES 1 through 30, inclusive, Defendants

1. 1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LAUREN A. CERRI (#282524)
MARK J. BOSKOVICH (#298688)
CERRI, BOSKOVICH & ALLARD LLP
96 NORTH THIRD STREET, SUITE 620
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95112
(408) 289-1417
Fax: (408) 289-8127
lcerri@cbalawfirm.com
mboskovich@cbalawfirm.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
MAISY DOE, a minor by and through her
Guardian ad Litem, KAREN DOE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
EMERY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
DANIEL PARHAM and ROES 1 through 30,
inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No.
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
(Childhood Sexual Abuse)
(1) Sexual Assault of a Minor
(2) Negligent Hiring, Supervision
and/or Retention of Daniel Parham
by District Employees [Government
Code §815.2]
(3) Negligent Supervision of Plaintiff by
District Employees [Government
Code §815.2]
Plaintiff MAISY DOE, a minor by and through her Guardian ad Litem, KAREN DOE,
herein alleges:
COMMON ALLEGATIONS
1. Plaintiff MAISY DOE, a California resident, brings this action under a pseudonym
due to the unusually sensitive nature of the allegations in this complaint.
2. Defendant EMERY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT [“DISTRICT”] is a public
entity, a school district in the County of Alameda, charged with the duty to implement various
programs and procedures for the safe education of students entrusted to its care, including students
attending Emery High School [“Emery HS”]. Pursuant to Government Code sections 905(m) and

2. 2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(p) and 935(f), Plaintiff is exempted from complying with the Government Claims Act
requirements.
3. At all times mentioned herein, defendant DANIEL PARHAM [“PARHAM”] was
employed by DISTRICT as a school security guard at Emery HS.
4. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that DISTRICT knew or
should have known as of the 2022-2023 school year of the risk that PARHAM might sexually
assault one or more minor female students. Upon information and belief, PARHAM had
inappropriately touched one or more minor female students from DISTRICT before and/or during
the 2022-2023 school year, including making unwanted advances on these students and poking
their waists without their permission. PARHAM frequently groped the waists, thighs, and
bottoms of minor female students on school grounds. PARHAM sent inappropriate one-on-one
electronic communications to female students.
5. Starting in or about September of 2023, while Plaintiff was a senior at Emery HS,
PARHAM used his position of trust and authority to groom Plaintiff for his future sexual
advances. PARHAM touched Plaintiff’s waist, thighs and buttocks on school grounds, gave her
compliments about her being beautiful, and discussed intimate topics with her over one-on-one
electronic communications. After gaining Plaintiff’s trust, PARHAM went on to sexually assault
Plaintiff on school grounds on at least three different occasions from late October 2023 through
early November 2023. PARHAM isolated Plaintiff behind closed and/or locked doors in the
senior center study room, a lab room, and a gym teacher’s office; and within each of these
locations PARHAM groped her thighs, waist, and buttocks, kissed her, digitally penetrated her
vagina, forced her to orally copulate him, and/or engaged in vaginal intercourse with her.
6. On one of these occasions, an Emory HS basketball coach entered the locker room
while PARHAM and Plaintiff were inside in the dark. The coach asked PARHAM what he was
doing, and PARHAM joked that he was “masturbating and taking a nap in the office”. PARHAM
told Plaintiff to hide. Upon information and belief, the basketball coach did not investigate any
further and did not report PARHAM to any DISTRICT personnel.

3. 3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7. Plaintiff notified an Emeryville Center of Community Life Pool [“ECCL”]
employee that she was concerned about being pregnant. Plaintiff told said ECCL employee that
the person who may have impregnated her was older than her and worked for the school. The
ECCL employee surmised that PARHAM was the culprit. Said ECCL employee informed
Plaintiff that another female student had notified him that PARHAM was touching her and
grabbing her waists, thighs, and buttocks.
8. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges PARHAM sexually
assaulted at least one other female student at Emory HS on multiple occasions on school grounds.
9. The true names and/or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or
otherwise, of defendants named herein as ROES 1 through 30, inclusive are unknown to Plaintiff
at this time, and Plaintiff therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will
seek leave to amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when the same have
been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the
defendants designated herein as ROES 1 through 30 are responsible in some manner or is
otherwise legally liable to Plaintiff for the injuries complained of herein.
10. At all times herein mentioned, each of the defendants was an agent, servant,
employee, partner, joint venturer, franchisee, alter ego, aider and abettor, and/or co-conspirator,
and engaged in a common or common enterprises with each of the remaining defendants herein,
and was at all relevant times acting within the course and scope of said agency, service,
employment, partnership, joint venture, franchise, unlawful enterprise, conspiracy and/or other
lawful or unlawful conduct as herein alleged.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Sexual Abuse of a Minor
As and for a First Cause of Action, Plaintiff MAISY DOE alleges against defendant
DANIEL PARHAM and ROES 1 and 2 as follows:
11. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all paragraphs of the Common Allegations, as though
set forth in full herein.

4. 4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12. As an employee of DISTRICT, PARHAM was under a duty to refrain from
engaging in any harmful activity towards the students entrusted to DISTRICT’s care, including
Plaintiff.
13. PARHAM used his position of trust and authority to groom Plaintiff for his sexual
advances and to sexually abuse her on school grounds.
14. As a legal result of the foregoing, Plaintiff was injured in health, strength and
activity, sustaining bodily injuries and shock and injury to her nervous system and person, all of
which caused and continue to cause her great mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering.
Plaintiff has thereby sustained damages in an amount in excess of the minimum jurisdictional
limits of this court.
15. The acts of defendant PARHAM perpetrated upon Plaintiff were intentional,
malicious, and/or oppressive, entitling Plaintiff to punitive damages against defendant PARHAM
pursuant to Civil Code section 3294.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligent Hiring, Supervision and/or Retention of Parham by District Employees
[Government Code §815.2]
As and for a Second Cause of Action, Plaintiff alleges against defendant EMERY
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and ROES 3 through 15 as follows:
16. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all paragraphs of the Common Allegations and First
Cause of Action, as though set forth in full herein.
17. As a minor and student enrolled at Emery HS, DISTRICT stood in a special
relationship with Plaintiff by which DISTRICT owed Plaintiff a duty to protect her against, inter
alia, sexual abuse by an employee on school grounds. Plaintiff was entitled to a reasonably safe
environment in which to learn, free from inappropriate exercise of authority over her person,
grooming behaviors, inappropriate touching, and sexual behaviors from educators, staff, and
others employed in a position of trust and authority over her at said school. As such, DISTRICT’s
employees owed Plaintiff a duty of care to, inter alia, properly screen personnel, to properly
supervise personnel, and to properly discipline personnel who present a risk of harm to students.

5. 5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
18. DISTRICT’s employees breached said duty owed to Plaintiff by, inter alia, failing
to properly screen PARHAM, failing to properly supervise PARHAM, failing to properly
discipline PARHAM for touching minor female students inappropriately on school grounds,
failing to properly discipline PARHAM for spending time alone with a minor female student
behind closed and/or locked doors, and/or failing to properly monitor the senior center and/or
science lab and/or gym office where PARHAM sexually abused Plaintiff.
19. As a legal result of the foregoing, Plaintiff was repeatedly sexually abused, and
thereby suffered physical, mental and emotional injuries, all to her general damages as
hereinbefore alleged.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligent Supervision of Plaintiff by District Employees
[Government Code §815.2]
As and for a Third Cause of Action, Plaintiff alleges against defendants EMERY
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and ROES 16 through 30 as follows:
20. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all paragraphs of her Common Allegations and First
and Second Causes of Action, as though set forth in full herein.
21. DISTRICT’s employees owed plaintiff a duty of care to, inter alia, properly
supervise Plaintiff to protect her from potential dangers while on school grounds, such as
repeatedly being alone with PARHAM on school grounds.
22. DISTRICT’s employees breached said duty owed to Plaintiff by, inter alia,
permitting Plaintiff to be isolated with PARHAM in the senior center and/or the science room
and/or the gym office behind closed/locked doors and/or failing to detect and deter such isolation.
23. As a legal result of the foregoing, Plaintiff was repeatedly sexually abused, and
thereby suffered physical, mental and emotional injuries, all to her general damages as
hereinbefore alleged.
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /

6. 6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, as to each and all causes of action, Plaintiff prays judgment as follows:
1. For general damages and other non-economic relief, according to proof;
2. For prejudgment interest, as allowed by law;
3. For punitive damages against defendant PARHAM;
4. For costs of suit herein; and,
5. For such other and further relief as the court may deem fit and proper.
Dated: March 14, 2024 CERRI, BOSKOVICH & ALLARD LLP
By:
LAUREN A. CERRI
MARK J. BOSKOVICH
Attorneys for Plaintiff