In November 2014, plaintiff Regina Crenshaw, a Black senior investigator with the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, was assigned to the Social Security Fraud Task Force, where she was supervised by Jeff Hudson. Crenshaw claimed that Hudson regularly used explicit, offensive language and gestures and that she witnessed him acting in a sexually inappropriate manner. She also claimed that in March 2015, Hudson made inappropriate comments to her about other people’s race and gender. In April 2015, Crenshaw reported Hudson’s alleged behavior to the District Attorney’s Human Resources Division, and Hudson was transferred to another department. However, Crenshaw claimed that she retaliated against for reporting Hudson and that when she complained about the retaliation to her supervisor, he failed to intervene and also began harassing her. Crenshaw was later placed on administrative leave and in November 2016, after four months of home duty, Crenshaw was notified that the county intended to terminate her. However, the county eventually allowed Crenshaw to take a 15-day suspension so that she could retain the right to pursue her claims against the office. Crenshaw returned to work in February 2017, and she was assigned to Central Investigations. However, she claimed the assignment was retaliatory. Crenshaw sued Hudson and her employer, the County of Los Angeles District Attorneys (which was initially erroneously sued as “the City of Los Angeles District Attorneys”). Crenshaw alleged that Hudson’s actions constituted racial and gender discrimination, and sexual harassment. She also alleged that the defendants’ actions after she complained about Hudson’s actions constituted retaliation. Crenshaw claimed that, in addition to Hudson regularly using explicit, offensive language and gestures, she witnessed Hudson speaking with and touching another female investigator in a sexually inappropriate manner. She also claimed that a co-worker told her that Hudson was constantly speaking about her breasts in a sexual context and that while Hudson did not mention her breasts to her directly, Crenshaw claimed Hudson constantly leered at her chest. Crenshaw alleged that on March 10, 2015, when she was riding with Hudson in a vehicle on assignment, Hudson stated that he was distressed that his daughter dated Black men exclusively and that during a separate car ride on March 11, 2015, Hudson told her that a Black female investigator at the office should not have been promoted to lieutenant because she was “stupid.” She also alleged that Hudson made disparaging comments about another Black female investigator’s physique, so she reported Hudson’s behavior to human resources in April 2015. However, Crenshaw claimed that after she reported Hudson, she was bullied by another senior investigator who was a friend of Hudson’s and that when she complained about the bullying to her supervisor, he failed to intervene and also began harassing her. Crenshaw claimed that as a result, she asked a friend to buff out a scratch on the bumper of her county-issued vehicle to avoid a confrontation with her supervisor, but the repair was found by the county during routine maintenance, so she was placed on administrative leave. In addition, Crenshaw claimed that when she returned from her 15-day suspension in February 2017, she found that she was assigned to Central Investigations, where she primarily performed background checks and expungements, which was a job usually reserved for entry-level investigators and soon-to-be retirees., Crenshaw claimed that she suffered emotional distress as a result of the events. She also claimed that she suffered a loss of income as a result of the actions against her. Crenshaw sought recovery for her loss of earnings and for her emotional pain and suffering.