Unanimous verdict sends powerful message that weaponizing the child protection system for personal and financial gain will not be tolerated.
LOS ANGELES — A Los Angeles Superior Court jury returned a $4.5 million verdict in favor of Plaintiff Grace Kang, a Los Angeles attorney, in the case of Kang v. Varughese (Case No. 22SMCV01309). The jury found that Defendant Jason Varughese, CEO and founder of Pink Cloud, knowingly made false child abuse reports against Kang, the mother of their young son, and awarded the following damages:
- $1.5 million for violations of California Penal Code § 11172(a);
- $2 million for intentional infliction of emotional distress; and
- $1 million in punitive damages.
“This $4.5 million verdict — including $1 million in punitive damages — sends an unequivocal message: weaponizing the child abuse reporting system for personal or financial gain carries serious consequences. We thank the jury for holding Mr. Varughese fully accountable for the devastating harm he inflicted on Ms. Kang,” said Michael C. Landman, trial counsel for Kang.
This case is one of the first civil jury verdicts for false child abuse reporting under California Penal Code § 11172(a).
Case Background
According to the lawsuit, in June 2022, Jason Varughese knowingly provided false information about suspected child abuse to a mandated reporter during a parenting class, triggering investigations by DCFS and LAPD. The lawsuit alleged the false allegations were intended to damage Grace Kang’s personal and professional reputation and generate personal and financial advantage for Varughese.
According to evidence presented at trial, despite knowing the allegations were unfounded, Varughese disseminated the accusations to professional and social contacts, including members of the parties’ shared Stanford University alumni network, causing significant reputational harm to Kang.
Evidence presented at trial further showed the allegations resulted in unannounced visits to Kang’s home, interviews involving her family and multiple agency investigations, all of which were ultimately closed as unfounded after authorities found no evidence of abuse or neglect. The jury also heard contemporaneous messages in which Varughese allegedly expressed no remorse regarding the investigations and used the allegations to garner sympathy and financial support.
The jury returned a unanimous verdict on liability, finding Varughese caused a false child abuse report to be made, knew the report was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth, and acted with malice, oppression or fraud.
Join the conversation!