Bitchin' Sauce Lawsuit, $9.1M Jury Verdict Exposes Shocking Workplace Abuse At Popular Food Brand

The Bitchin’ Sauce lawsuit sent shockwaves through the food and beverage industry when a California jury awarded a staggering $9.1 million to a former employee who endured sexual harassment, wage violations, and retaliation. The November 2024 verdict against Bitchin’ Inc., Bitchin’ Sauce LLC, and Bitchin’ Beach Club LLC marks one of California’s top 10 employment verdicts for 2024 and the highest award for meal and rest break violations in the state that year.

Sarah Freeman, a recreational program lead hired in late 2020, filed the lawsuit in August 2022 after experiencing what the jury determined was egregious workplace misconduct. The case shines a harsh spotlight on employment law violations and corporate accountability in the food industry.

What Happened: The Bitchin’ Sauce Lawsuit Explained

The Bitchin’ Sauce legal case centers on Sarah Freeman’s employment at Bitchin’ Beach Club in Carlsbad, California. Freeman’s role involved organizing recreational activities, maintaining facilities, and managing events for the popular sauce company’s beach club venture.

According to court documents and trial testimony, Freeman faced a toxic work environment that included multiple violations of California employment law.

Sexual Harassment Allegations

The lawsuit detailed disturbing allegations of sexual harassment by Freeman’s direct supervisor, Drew Keefer. Court records show that Keefer made explicit and degrading comments, including:

Claims of ejaculating in Freeman’s coffee
Inappropriate sexual references involving her family members
Repeated unwanted sexual advances and propositions

When Freeman reported concerns about Keefer’s tardiness and absenteeism to Human Resources, the company allegedly informed Keefer about her complaints. This led to immediate retaliation, with Keefer instructing Freeman to never report him again.

Wage and Hour Violations

Beyond sexual harassment, the Bitchin’ Sauce lawsuit exposed systematic wage theft affecting Freeman over nearly 18 months of employment:

Employee misclassification
Denial of legally required meal breaks
Denial of mandatory rest breaks
Unpaid overtime compensation
Being forced to work off the clock

The jury found meal break violations spanning 237 workdays, with CEO Starr Edwards personally involved in these violations.

The $9.1 Million Verdict Breakdown

After 12 days of trial in San Diego County Superior Court, the jury rendered a decisive verdict on November 27, 2024.

Compensatory Damages: $4,000,000+

The jury awarded Freeman more than $4 million in compensatory damages for:

Emotional distress from sexual harassment
Financial losses from unpaid wages and overtime
Retaliation damages
Meal and rest break penalties
Lost employment benefits

Punitive Damages: $5,048,000

In a particularly damning finding, the jury determined that Bitchin’ Inc., Bitchin’ Sauce LLC, and Bitchin’ Beach Club LLC acted with “malice, oppression, and fraud.” This extraordinary finding triggered punitive damages:

$2,500,000 against Bitchin’ Inc.
$2,500,000 against Bitchin’ Sauce LLC
$48,000 against Bitchin’ Beach Club LLC

The total verdict of $9,102,128 represents one of the largest employment law verdicts in California for 2024.

Legal Claims in the Bitchin’ Sauce Employment Case

Freeman’s attorneys, Golnar Fozi and Jeremy Dwork of Fozi Dwork & Modafferi LLP, filed multiple claims under California employment law.

California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) Violations

The lawsuit included several FEHA claims:

Sexual harassment based on gender
Gender discrimination in the workplace
Retaliation for reporting harassment
Failure to prevent harassment and discrimination

California Labor Code Violations

Freeman alleged numerous Labor Code violations that affect thousands of California workers:

Misclassification of employees
Failure to pay overtime wages (Labor Code §510)
Denial of meal breaks (Labor Code §512)
Denial of rest breaks (Labor Code §226.7)
Failure to provide accurate wage statements

Retaliation Claims

The lawsuit emphasized retaliation after Freeman exercised her legal rights:

Retaliation for participating in a workplace investigation
Retaliation for complaining about working off the clock
Retaliation for taking protected sick leave
Retaliatory schedule changes
Wrongful termination

If you’re facing employment discrimination or wrongful termination, understanding your legal rights is crucial.

The Company’s Defense: What Bitchin’ Sauce Argued

Defendants Bitchin’ Inc., Bitchin’ Sauce LLC, Bitchin’ Beach Club LLC, and CEO Starr Edwards denied all allegations. Their defense strategy included several key arguments.

Insufficient Evidence Claims

Defense attorneys argued that Freeman’s complaint lacked sufficient factual support and contained vague, ambiguous claims. They maintained that the company acted on legitimate business purposes rather than unlawful conduct.

Alternative Narrative

The fired supervisor, Drew Keefer, testified that he made allegations against Freeman because he was “sad” about being terminated. He claimed:

The conduct between himself and Freeman was “friendly and joking”
He didn’t believe it constituted sexual harassment at the time
Freeman wasn’t telling the complete story

Other employees testified they never observed sexual harassment between the parties.

Company Policies Defense

Defendants pointed to their written policies prohibiting harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. They argued these policies ensured equal opportunity regardless of protected characteristics.

However, the jury rejected these defenses, finding the company liable on multiple counts.

What This Verdict Means for Food Industry Employers

The Bitchin’ Sauce litigation carries significant implications for food and beverage businesses, restaurants, and hospitality companies across California and beyond.

Heightened Scrutiny of Meal and Rest Breaks

California’s meal and rest break requirements are strict. Employers must provide:

30-minute meal break for shifts over 5 hours
10-minute rest break for every 4 hours worked
Additional breaks for longer shifts

The record-breaking meal break penalty in this case signals that juries take these violations seriously. With 237 workdays of violations, the message is clear: systematic denial of breaks will result in substantial penalties.

Corporate Liability for Supervisor Misconduct

The jury’s finding that CEO Starr Edwards was personally involved in meal break violations demonstrates that corporate leadership cannot insulate themselves from liability. Companies face exposure when:

Leadership is aware of violations
Supervisors create hostile work environments
Human Resources fails to properly investigate complaints
Companies retaliate against complainants

Importance of Proper HR Response

One of the most damaging facts in the Bitchin’ Sauce case was the company’s response to Freeman’s initial complaints. Rather than conducting a confidential investigation, HR immediately informed the alleged harasser, leading to predictable retaliation.

Proper HR protocol requires:

Confidential intake of complaints
Immediate separation of parties during investigation
Neutral third-party investigators
No retaliation against complainants
Prompt corrective action when violations are found

Understanding how to file a wage and hour complaint empowers workers to protect their rights.

Legal Precedent: Similar Employment Lawsuits

The Bitchin’ Sauce lawsuit joins a growing number of high-value employment verdicts in California.

Recent Comparable Cases

California juries have increasingly awarded substantial damages for employment law violations:

Martinez v. Southern California Edison (2022): $450 million for sexual harassment
Gonzalez v. Lazer Broadcasting (2023): Sexual harassment by repeat offender
Gravina v. City of Los Angeles (2011): Class action for meal break violations

These cases establish that California courts take employment law violations seriously, particularly when they involve sexual harassment combined with wage theft.

Punitive Damages Standard

To award punitive damages in California, juries must find that defendants acted with:

Malice: Intention to cause harm or conscious disregard of others’ rights
Oppression: Despicable conduct subjecting someone to cruel and unjust hardship
Fraud: Intentional misrepresentation or concealment of material facts

The jury’s finding of all three in the Bitchin’ Sauce legal case represents one of the most severe condemnations possible in civil litigation.

Employee Rights Under California Law

The Bitchin’ Sauce lawsuit highlights fundamental protections for California workers.

Protected Activities

California law protects employees who:

Report harassment or discrimination
Participate in workplace investigations
File wage claims or complaints
Take protected medical leave
Request legally mandated breaks
Refuse to work off the clock

Employers cannot retaliate against workers for exercising these rights.

Statute of Limitations

Understanding filing deadlines is crucial:

FEHA claims: 3 years to file lawsuit (after DFEH/CRD process)
Wage claims: 3-4 years depending on violation type
Wrongful termination: Generally 2 years

Acting quickly preserves your legal options. Consulting with employment lawyers soon after violations occur ensures you don’t miss critical deadlines.

Damages Available

California employment law provides multiple forms of compensation:

Back pay and lost wages
Front pay for future lost earnings
Emotional distress damages
Punitive damages for egregious conduct
Attorney fees and costs
Prejudgment interest

The substantial award in the Bitchin’ Sauce case demonstrates juries’ willingness to fully compensate victims of workplace abuse.

The Broader Context: Bitchin’ Sauce Company History

The lawsuit emerged during a turbulent period for the once-beloved sauce brand. Court records indicate this wasn’t the only employment dispute facing the company.

Multiple Employment Lawsuits

Public court records reveal additional lawsuits filed against Bitchin’ Sauce:

Perez v. Bitchin Sauce LLC (2023): Wrongful termination claim filed July 31, 2023
Rodriguez v. Bitchin’ Inc. (2024): New York employment case

These multiple cases suggest potential systemic employment law issues rather than isolated incidents.

Co-Founder Departure

The company’s co-founders, known as the Smitty Bros, previously departed from Bitchin’ Sauce amid reported disagreements over business practices and values. They’ve since launched JeeSauce, a competing brand.

In their podcast addressing the $9.1 million verdict, the former co-founders stated the case confirmed concerns they’d raised internally for years about company culture and practices.

What Employers Must Do Now

The Bitchin’ Sauce verdict serves as an urgent wake-up call for food industry employers and businesses across all sectors.

Immediate Action Steps

Employers should take these protective measures:

Audit wage practices: Review timekeeping, meal break documentation, and overtime calculations
Train management: Ensure supervisors understand harassment prevention and proper HR protocols
Update policies: Implement clear anti-harassment, anti-retaliation, and wage-hour policies
Establish reporting systems: Create confidential complaint mechanisms with neutral investigators
Document everything: Maintain thorough records of investigations, corrective actions, and employee communications

Warning Signs to Address

Red flags that indicate potential liability:

Supervisors with unchecked authority
Informal timekeeping systems
Employees regularly working through breaks
Complaints going to direct supervisors rather than HR
High turnover in specific departments
Employees classified as exempt without proper justification

Insurance Considerations

Employment practices liability insurance (EPLI) is crucial, but policies have limits. The $9.1 million verdict likely exceeds most standard EPLI policies. Employers should:

Review policy limits and exclusions
Consider umbrella coverage
Understand what conduct voids coverage
Report potential claims promptly

How Victims Can Protect Their Rights

If you’re experiencing similar workplace violations, take these steps to protect yourself.

Document Everything

Create a detailed record:

Dates, times, and locations of incidents
Names of witnesses
Text messages, emails, and other communications
Performance reviews and disciplinary actions
Timesheets and pay stubs
Photos or videos when appropriate

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah