Press Democrat Owner Sued by Whistleblower From Private Hunting Club

As of February '25, Wing & Barrel Ranch's former General Manager, Joe Travaglio, has sued media mogul Darius Anderson for wrongful termination from the hunting club

On February 25, 2025, Mr. Joe Travaglio, former General Manager of Wing & Barrel Ranch, filed a wrongful termination lawsuit (25CV01420 | Travaglio vs Kenwood BPSC Hunt Club LLC) against Mr. Darius Anderson, the Ranch’s Co-founder and CEO.

As the owner of Sonoma Media Investments (The Press Democrat, Sonoma Index-Tribune, North Bay Business Journal, etc.) none of Mr. Anderson’s publications have mentioned this active lawsuit.

Mr. Travaglio is being represented by Esquire Nathan Kingery, Wilshire Law Firm. The plaintiff is suing for age discrimination, harassment, negligent hiring/supervision/retention, failure to prevent discriminatory practices, Fair Employment & Housing Act retaliation, unlawful business practices, defamation and labor code violations with the demand for a jury trial.

Per the case file:

The plaintiff was terminated just weeks before he was due a contractual per of approximately $28k. The termination was retaliatory and pretextual, based on fabricated allegations of misconduct.

Plaintiff’s whistleblower complaints and retaliation

1. Illegal sale of alcohol to minors

   1. In June 2024, plaintiff reported to Marisol Lopez, Defendant’s Chief Operations Officer, that Defendant was illegally selling alcohol to minors in response to member demands. Plaintiff raised concerns that this violated California liquor laws and could result in serious legal consequences, including the revocation of the Defendant’s liquor license. Ms. Lopez instructed Plaintiff to take the matter to Mr. Anderson, who dismissed the concerns and failed to take corrective action. Mr. Anderson’s attitude towards the Plaintiff shifted after this complaint.

2. Unlawful firearms application scheme

   1. In November 2024, Mr. Anderson and Beau Mattioda who served as Defendant’s Director of Sporting Activities, instructed Plaintiff to assist Mr. Anderson in obtaining a concealed carry permit (CCW). Mr. Anderson explicitly requested that employees complete the application and training on his behalf - a clear violation of California law. Plaintiff refused to participate in this illegal scheme, warning Mr. Anderson and Mr. Mattioda that falsifying a CCW application was unlawful. This refusal further alienated the Plaintiff from Mr. Anderson, who resented his insistence on legal compliance.

3. Abuse of liquor license and illegal alcohol sales

   1. In December 2024, Plaintiff discovered that Mr. Anderson was misusing the business’ liquor license by illegally selling alcohol at cost to his friends at other clubs, a violation of California alcohol laws. Plaintiff reported these concerns to Ms. Lopez and directly warned Mr. Anderson that his actions could result in the loss of his liquor license. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff was excluded from meetings, including a critical discussion with the Bohemian Club.

4. Pattern of retaliation leading to termination

   1. Anderson falsely claimed that there were four formal written complaints about Plaintiff’s management style, yet when Plaintiff inquired with HR, no such complaints existed. These fabricated allegations were used as a pretext to justify the Plaintiff’s termination.

   2. On January 30, 2025, Plaintiff met with Mr. Anderson and HR Manager Brian Martinez, during which Mr. Anderson raised two minor administrative issues regarding an employee’s consecutive workdays and a lease compliance matter. Plaintiff had already addressed issues via email. The very next day, January 31, the Plaintiff was abruptly terminated.

   3. Following his termination, Defendant attempted to coerce Plaintiff into accepting a $72,187.50 severance package, which included a release of claims, further confirming that Defendant was aware of its legal exposure.

5. Age discrimination

   1. Throughout Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant sought to replace him with a younger, less experienced individual. In September 2024, Mr. Anderson and Ms. Lopez hired Michael Gargus as Director of Membership against Plaintiff’s recommendation. Mr. Gargus, a significantly younger employee with no relevant experience, had openly expressed his desire to become GM. Plaintiff explicitly warned Ms. Lopez that Mr. Gargus’ hiring appeared to be a prelude to Plaintiff’s termination, yet Plaintiff’s concerns were ignored.

6. Defamation

   1. Two days after Plaintiff’s termination, Anderson made false and defamatory statements to club members, falsely claiming that Plaintiff was terminated for “employment law and racial profiling violations”. These statements were completely baseless and intended to damage Plaintiff’s professional reputation. Plaintiff has multiple witnesses who attended this meeting and can confirm the defamatory remarks.

Hostile work environment

1. Plaintiff was persistently subjected to:

   1. Anderson’s erratic, abusive and narcissistic behavior

   2. Threats and intimidation, including an incident where Anderson’s wife, ‘WN’, threatened to kill plaintiff

   3. Ethical and legal dilemmas arising from Anderson’s demands that Plaintiff engage in unlawful action

   4. Retaliatory isolation

‘You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.’ -Exodus 20:16

---

Related Articles