In a significant legal development, a former employee has filed a comprehensive lawsuit against a California state agency, alleging a series of workplace violations that include hostile work environment, retaliation, and discrimination. The complaint was lodged by Joshua Kersten on November 7, 2025, in the Superior Court of California for the County of Sacramento against the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB). The lawsuit outlines numerous grievances that Kersten experienced during his tenure at FTB from March 2010 until his departure in July 2023.
Kersten’s complaint is extensive, detailing eleven causes of action against FTB. Among these are allegations of hostile work environment and retaliation under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), wrongful constructive discharge in violation of public policy, breach of settlement agreement, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The plaintiff accuses FTB of failing to prevent discrimination and harassment as mandated by law. Kersten claims that he was coerced into signing a settlement agreement following an appeal from a Notice of Adverse Action (NOAA), which he later found was not honored by FTB. He alleges that FTB breached this agreement by failing to expunge negative records from his personnel file as promised, which adversely affected his employment prospects.
The narrative unfolds with Kersten’s detailed account of workplace mistreatment spanning over thirteen years at FTB. He describes a culture rife with nepotism and favoritism where promotions were allegedly influenced by familial connections rather than merit. Kersten recounts being subjected to physical harassment by colleagues and supervisors who mocked his health conditions and personal attributes. Specific incidents include derogatory comments about his masculinity made by supervisor Sean Dustin and physical assaults perpetrated by lead Amy Jackson/Hertzell.
Kersten further accuses FTB management of systemic retaliation following his complaints about workplace misconduct. He cites instances where management failed to address stalking behavior directed at him or took punitive actions instead. Despite receiving commendations for his performance early in his career, Kersten alleges that subsequent evaluations were unfairly biased due to ongoing hostility from supervisors.
In seeking redress from the court, Kersten demands rescission of the breached settlement agreement alongside declaratory relief confirming its nullification. He requests compensatory damages for emotional distress caused by FTB’s actions and seeks injunctive relief to prevent further violations under FEHA. Additionally, he demands reinstatement rights to pursue original claims compromised under the flawed settlement.
Representing himself in this case as “In Pro Per,” Joshua Kersten stands firm on holding FTB accountable for what he describes as egregious breaches of both contractual obligations and statutory duties designed to protect employees’ rights within California’s public sector workplaces.
The case is presided over by Judge S. Decker with Case ID Pawo?1oF; however, specific details regarding legal representation for either party remain undisclosed in the document provided.
Source: 25CV027107_Joshua_Kersten_v_California_Franchise _Complaint_County_of_Sacramento_California.pdf
