SAN FRANCISCO—In a lawsuit filed Friday in California Superior Court in San Francisco, a man employed by North Carolina-based Adult Entertainment Broadcast Network (AEBN) to work as a grip on porn shoots for Falcon Studios and Raging Stallion Studios is accusing his employer of wrongful termination and other violations of state law related to his assertion that he was forced to inject a model's penis with an erection enhancement drug called TriMix, during which he accidentally pricked his finger with the needle after using it on the performer.
Filed Oct. 11 by Elisa J. Stewart, counsel for the plaintiff, Ronald Baker, the 14-page complaint lists AEBN, Falcon, Raging Stallion and another SF-based company, DataTech, as defendants, along with unnamed Does 1-10.
The incident with the needle took place on or about January 29, 2012, following "months of refusing directions and pressure by Baker's employer to inject models with TriMix," according to the complaint. Apparently succumbing to pressure, he "followed the directions of his employer and injected TriMix into a model's penis. While replacing the cap on the syringe, the tip of the syringe pierced the cap and plaintiff's thumb."
The complaint goes on to charge that following the accident Baker was told to inquire into the model's HIV status, which he says he did. The model replied he was negative, and when Baker relayed that information to the head of production and then asked what he should do next, he says the employer told him "that he did not know what to do."
The following day, the complaint alleges that Falcon's CFO told Baker that "the employer would accept responsibility for the costs associated with plaintiff's injury and emotional distress."
It continues, "Plaintiff later discovered that the TriMix distributed by defendants to its models is distributed in violation of federal and state criminal laws given that it is a prescription medication being provided to models not named on the prescription. Such conduct exposes defendants and its employees, to the extent that they know or have reason to know that the TriMix is not prescribed to the models it is administered, to criminal consequences."
Baker did not return to work once he realized this, the complaint states, adding, "On or about March 9, 2012, plaintiff, through his counsel, made it clear that he would not perform any job duty which would require him to violate federal and/or state criminal laws. Plaintiff further complained of being repeatedly directed to engage in conduct which was unlawful, caused him physical injury and severe distress. Plaintiff further complained that when he performed the injection at the direction of his employer, that he pierced his thumb with the syringe and became immediately concerned about his health. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff's employer stopped paying his wages and then stopped paying for his health benefits/insurance."
Despite the fact that the accidental pricking incident happened in January, and that Baker admits that he tested negative immediately following the accident and also after "several months of rigorous testing to repeatedly check his health status," he claims in the complaint that "he will need to continue to be retested." Why that is so after eight months of negative testing is unclear.
However, the complaint does allege that "as a result of this event, plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress with symptoms which include but are not limited to shortness of breath, light headedness, dizziness, irritability, stomach aches, bloody bowel movements, diarrhea, weight loss, depression, anxiety and sleeplessness."
In addition to the specifics regarding the accident and the way in which Baker says management acted following the incident, the complaint also levies more general claims against the companies, including that in their effort to keep production costs low the defendants illegally procured TriMex, a prescription drug, for use by performers for whom it had not been prescribed. They then allegedly required "employees to perform injections when they have no skill, training, licensure or special knowledge to perform such injections," inject "the penises of models engaged in pornography in which the employer does not know the HIV or Hepatitis status of the models injected," and had "no protocol or policy in place for how to respond to situations where an employee pricks his finger with a syringe that was used on a model."
"These failures by the employer resulted in plaintiff's injuries," the complaint adds, "including severe emotional distress related to being exposed to such diseases as Hepatitis C and HIV."
Baker is suing for wrongful termination, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and individual violations of the labor code and the business and professions code. The suit is seeking unspecified damages in addition to attorney's fees, and is asking the court to enjoin the defendants from "engaging in each of the unlawful practices set forth in this complaint."
A case management conference was scheduled by the court for March 13, 2013 at 10:30 a.m. in San Francisco. Superior Court policy requires that "every civil case participate in either mediation, judicial or non-judicial arbitration, the early settlement program or some suitable form of alternative dispute resolution prior to a trial."
AVN contacted AEBN for comment but had not heard back by press time. The marketing director for Falcon/Raging Stallion said the company does not comment on pending litigation.
The complaint can be accessed here.
