In a dramatic legal showdown, a former employee has filed a lawsuit against her previous employer, alleging wrongful termination and discrimination. Veronica Sadeghzadeh lodged the complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara on October 21, 2025, accusing Elco Electric, Inc. of various violations under state employment laws.
Veronica Sadeghzadeh claims that her termination from Elco Electric was not only unjust but also discriminatory. She began working for Elco in December 2016 as an office manager and was terminated on June 30, 2024. The lawsuit details a series of grievances related to her pregnancy and subsequent treatment by the company. Sadeghzadeh alleges that after informing her employer about her pregnancy with twins in July 2023, she faced numerous discriminatory actions. These included being asked to work during her statutory leave and having her health insurance downgraded once her children were added to the plan. She further asserts that Elco failed to provide necessary accommodations or engage in a good faith interactive process regarding her pregnancy-related disabilities.
The complaint is extensive, listing eleven causes of action against Elco Electric and unnamed defendants referred to as Does 1-50. Among these are accusations of discrimination and retaliation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), failure to prevent workplace discrimination and retaliation, violation of California Government Code §12945 concerning pregnancy disability leave rights, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. “Plaintiff’s sex-gender (female); pregnancy; disabilities; her requesting reasonable accommodations…were substantial motivating reasons for Elco’s termination,” the complaint states.
Sadeghzadeh seeks several forms of relief from the court including general damages for economic loss due to wrongful termination, punitive damages intended to punish Elco for their alleged misconduct, statutory penalties under relevant labor codes, attorney fees, costs associated with litigation, as well as declaratory and injunctive relief aimed at preventing future unlawful conduct by the defendants. Her legal representation argues that Elco’s actions were maliciously intended to harm Sadeghzadeh and acted with an improper motive amounting to malice.
Representing Veronica Sadeghzadeh is Mark C. Le Clerc from Le Clerc & Le Clerc LLP based in San Francisco. The case has been reviewed by J. Nguyen under Case No. 25CV478164 at the Superior Court of California located in Santa Clara County.
Source: 25CV478164_Veronica_Sadeghzadeh_v_Elco_Electric_Complaint_County_of_Santa_Clara_California..pdf
