Entertainment

Lawsuit Alleges Actress Sharon Stone Banned Nanny From Reading the Bible

Hollywood isn’t known for having an overtly Christian culture. In fact, many of the values associated with the celebrity lifestyle are, well, less than Biblical. But even with this in mind, new allegations coming from actress Sharon Stone’s former nanny are surprising. In a lawsuit filed by Erlinda Elemen, the one-time nanny to Stone’s children says that the Hollywood icon mocked both her Filipino heritage and her Christian beliefs.

Lawsuit Claims Sharon Stone Banned Nanny Erlinda Elemen From Reading Bible

The complaint was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Wednesday, according to The Christian Post. In addition to these purported offenses, the “Basic Instinct” actress is also accused in the lawsuit of wrongfully terminating Elemen’s contract to work with the family following an alleged dispute over overtime pay.

The Post has more, providing details surrounding the timeline that led to this intriguing case:

The lawsuit says Elemen was promoted from assistant nanny to head nanny for Stone in September of 2008. Her new position required her to live at Stone‘s home so she could care for the actress’s three children. She was also required to travel with the children for long periods of time when necessary.

In August 2010, Stone allegedly began making derogatory comments about Elemen’s Filipino heritage, including comments that “equated being Filipino with being stupid,” the lawsuit states. It also claims Stone told Elemen not to speak to her children, because she didn’t want them to learn to talk like Elemen.

The actress also allegedly attacked Elemen’s Christian beliefs. The suit says she criticized the nanny for regularly attending church and, on one occasion, told her she wasn’t allowed to read the Bible even in her own room.

Lawsuit Claims Sharon Stone Banned Nanny Erlinda Elemen From Reading Bible

The overtime dispute didn’t develop until early 2011, when Stone reportedly learned about the fact that Elemen was receiving overtime pay on holidays and during travel time she spent with the children. The former nanny claims that Stone accused her of “stealing” and said that she shouldn’t have accepted the extra income. Then, she purportedly asked for the money back. Weeks later, after allegedly embarrassing Elemen in front of the staff, Stone fired her.

“A common problem for employees in household occupations concerns the receipt of overtime and other wages. When a celebrity does it, it only serves to draw attention to the fact that there are thousands of people who are being underpaid,” explained Solomon Gresen, the lawyer representing Elemen. “Hopefully, the publicity generated from this lawsuit will be of benefit to others and will prompt some change in the lives of ordinary citizens.”

A spokesperson for the actress, though, is being publicly dismissive of the case, calling it “frivolous” and claiming that the former nanny is merely looking for a way to make a quick buck.

Lawsuit Claims Sharon Stone Banned Nanny Erlinda Elemen From Reading Bible

“This is an absurd lawsuit that has been filed by a disgruntled ex-employee who is obviously looking to get money any way she can,” said Paul Bloch, a rep for Stone. “After she was terminated approximately 1½ years ago, she filed claims for alleged disability and worker’s compensation. Now, she is obviously looking for another opportunity to cash in.”

In her lawsuit, Elemen claims she has medical expenses, among others, as a result of “physical and mental anguish.“ The former nanny also claims ”emotional distress” in the filing and seems to allege that these issues will be remaining with her for quite some time.

As E! notes, Stone, who is 54, has three adopted sons – 12-year-old Roan, 7-year-old Laird and 5-year-old Quinn.

(H/T: Christian Post)

Comments (81)

1 2 3
  • stimpy17
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:04am

    What ever……I’d still do her.

    Report Post » stimpy17  
    • Joede
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 12:47pm

      She was outdated and no one has even remembered or mentioned her name so she had to stir some controversy.

      Report Post »  
    • judymac10
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 7:44pm

      face down or face up

      Report Post »  
  • JRook
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 10:02am

    So i guess the National Enquirer didn’t cover this critical story well enough.

    Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:08pm

      @JROK,

      Are you suggesting that just because this “story” does not meet some sort of “lofty” standard that you have arbitrarily set for us, that the Blaze should ignore it?

      Even when a quick search reveals that the “story” has made news on major outlets the world over?

      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-24/former-nanny-sues-sharon-stone/4030538

      It would seem that you prefer censorship of things that might cast a dim view on the people that inhabit the left side of this world.

      Define “news” Rook.

      If you do not like the headline of a particular story………..you are free to “MOVE ON”

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • JRook
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:35pm

      @Rightsofbilly I’m saying that the story has no traction other than it is Sharon Stone. Baby sitters, Nanny’s and any number of domestic help get fired everyday for stupider things that this. And of course the wealthy get sued everyday for stupider things than this. So no the story has no relevance than it having something to do with celebrities. Really don’t think you should let it interrupt you watching the Jerry Springer show.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:55pm

      @ROOK

      Gee Rook, don’t take it so personal. I was just taking a jab at you because you like to always take jabs at the Blaze for not living up to your “lofty lefty” standards.

      And we know what kind of standards those are……….don’t we?

      It’s relevant for no other reason than that it is “news”. And the Blaze brings us “news”. Even if that “news” is not up to snuff in your eyes Rook. Move On.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Anonymous T. Irrelevant
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 3:30pm

      Why do people like this want to procreate? What do they have that they want to pass on to future generations?

      Report Post » Anonymous T. Irrelevant  
    • Ded-Bred
      Posted on May 27, 2012 at 4:14pm

      What’s so sad is sharon would deny her own children the chance to hear truth & make their own decision about the most important choice any of us make is the worst part: the sitter has her convictions & no shriveled white raisin wasting away without any convictions would change her beliefs.

      Report Post » Ded-Bred  
  • lukerw
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:45am

    The ‘Adaams Family’; Hot & Crazy go together!

    Report Post » lukerw  
  • Legalette
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:38am

    If Sharon Stone did not even want the nanny to speak to her children, why in the world would she promote the nanny to “head nanny?” This just doesn’t pass the smell test.

    Report Post »  
    • Link8on
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:00am

      Sharon can hire an Unionist Athiest nanny who puts up conservative images on pinata’s all over the house for the kids to whack.

      Her kids can then grow up to camp around with the occupy crowd to “Eat the Rich”, toss paint cans, and repeat diatribes as part of the human crowd speaker system.

      Report Post » Link8on  
    • ScoobyCheese
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 12:08pm

      “Head” nanny? How many nannies does one person need?

      My question is, why adopt three children if you are going to take no part in raising them? She sounds more like she’s running a daycare center than being a mother to three children who needed one.

      Report Post »  
    • ncrdbl1
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 10:56pm

      This witch “adopted” three kids and then hires nannies to take care of them so she doesn’t have to. The kids are just a status symbol to her.

      Report Post »  
  • sawbuck
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:34am

    I’m sure there are “Atheist Nanny’s” out their touting themselves…!

    Although….It will cost you…!

    They DO think their so much superior to everyone else.

    And expect to be paid accordingly ..Just to be in their presence .

    Who would have thought that NOT believing in something ..

    Makes a person THINK…They’re some kind of genius.

    Report Post » sawbuck  
    • JudyG46
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 12:41pm

      And…they probably have the ACLU on their side; so, watch out Sharon…you may jump from the proverbial ‘frying pan into the fire’! Althoug, liberals can usually ‘pay their way out of things’ with other liberals!

      Report Post » JudyG46  
    • pebbles
      Posted on May 26, 2012 at 2:46pm

      What?

      Report Post »  
  • marjorie faye
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:32am

    I have zero interest in the denizens of the Hollywood entertainment industry, and I urge fellow conservatives to adopt the same attitude. They are a liberal blight on our culture and nation. They are hugely responsible for the unbelievable moral decay in America. Not to mention that most of them have absolutely no ability to think straight. Cut off the oxygen to their careers by refusing to buy their products. Don’t listen to their music. Don’t pay money to see their movies. Don’t watch the idiots on television. If you really want to do something about their power in America, you can do so by affecting their pocketbook. Otherwise, you might as well just stop complaining.

    Report Post »  
    • oneshiner
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:15am

      Here, here! I‘ve don’t this for years. I avoid anything or anyone who annoys me as much as they do.
      People like my sister who fawn all over them is disgusting. I can’t even stand the new rage on TV, i.e. any so called (scripted) reality shows. ha! what a joke they are. Boring, get a life.

      Report Post »  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:23am

    She sounds bitter because her career has floundered and her looks are gone. Have a nice day Sharon.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • oneshiner
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:10am

      Her career? The only thing she ever did was open her knees to show her crotch and that made her a starz. This woman of no virtues or morals could have fired the nanny at any time, but kept her there to berate and embarrass her (kinda like a whupping post) to relieve herself of all the pent up anger she must live with daily. This Stone gal seems to have emotional problems and takes it out on others.

      Report Post »  
    • oneshiner
      Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:21am

      What the Nanny does in her own room and what she reads (bible) is her personal business and not this dumb stone woman. Seems like the nanny did a good enough job to be made head nanny, but the problem arose when when wanted her legal overtime pay. What a wuss this stone gal is.

      Report Post »  
  • EP46
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:10am

    PAY Erlinda Elemen her FAIR SHARE…and make sure you have paid YOUR taxes.

    Report Post »  
  • Bryan B
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 9:05am

    Sharon Stone and her Lawyers will settle, there is no way Stone’s Lawyers want to see the inside of a court room on this.

    Can you say public relations nightmare……

    Report Post » Bryan B  
  • Dismayed Veteran
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:59am

    She may have a case with the overtime pay. Under the provisions of the Wage and Hour Act, travel time is counted toward hours worked for the purpose of computing overtime as long as she was doing her job of tending the kids.

    The rest of the stuff sounds phoney. Unless there were witnesses, it is just she said/she said.

    Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
  • POdVet
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:52am

    This is why the Hollywood Elite want an open border. A good illegal immigrant wouldn’t have dared talk back to Ms Stone like that. She is a movie star, while the nanny is obviously just a subspecies of human there for the “progressives” to use and abuse as they see fit.

    Report Post »  
    • StopIsrahell
      Posted on May 27, 2012 at 8:22am

      True. Stone is just like other Hollywood sickos and the Zionist group that owns and controls all that filth. Media won’t report about these stories much sadly. Like wealthy Jewish communities hiring illegals for maids and live-in nannys (slave goyim), then forbid them from being Christian and forbid them from eating pork. Forcing their under-paid illegals and others to comply with Kosher standards and being forced to live and eat like their Jewish Masters do and live “Kosher.” When we worked construction in or next to Jewish communities and some locked-down with tight security weren’t allowed to bring non-Kosher food like pulled pork sandwiches to work, or we had to go out to eat to pacify the wealthy Zionist controllers of America and their locale. Hollywood like the elite phony Christian groups of TBN you either support the Zionist or you don’t get in the Hollywood scene or on TV. Stone was probably left barren from having all that sex with all those anti-American Zionist in Hollyweird thereby catching every STD in the book. Given how they are in Hollywood it is probably full of STDs and Rock Hudson types. Bloria Alred probably wouldn’t take the case because she would then be going against – her own, and G_d forbid she wouldn’t want to do that. Oh my. Celebrity-ism and the sick idol worship from those types have ruined this land.

      Report Post »  
  • HaroldHeard
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:52am

    This is a typical action for Hollywood types, and its sad really.

    Report Post » HaroldHeard  
  • kentuckypatriot
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:49am

    Maybe the nanny should’ve hired Gloria Allred to stand up for her “ civil rights” ( sarc)

    Report Post » kentuckypatriot  
  • Strat-M16
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:47am

    I hope the suit gets thrown out. That’s the problem w/ our society. If the nanny does not like being berated she can work for someone else. If Stone wants to be Godless, it’s her right to burn in Hell. Leave it at that. Does everything gotta go to court?.

    Report Post » Strat-M16  
  • Locked
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:41am

    “The actress also allegedly attacked Elemen’s Christian beliefs. The suit says she criticized the nanny for regularly attending church and, on one occasion, told her she wasn’t allowed to read the Bible even in her own room.”

    While it makes the actress a jerk, why is this relevant for a lawsuit? As far as I know, nannying is private business agreement between the nanny and the employer, which both parties can either take or leave. If the nanny didn’t like that she was forbidden from reading the Bible, she should have quit. Bringing it up in a lawsuit seems like sour grapes, not important legal evidence.

    Report Post »  
  • Magyar
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:37am

    If the nanny is a Christian– she should simply shut up and go about her business and have faith that GOD will provide— and lastly, as difficult as it may seem– she needs to pray for Sharon—

    Report Post »  
  • RedDirtTexas
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:37am

    And this is important because…..? I’ve come to despise Hollywood. Period! And all the moths that are drawn there. Ya sleep with dogs ya get fleas!

    Report Post » RedDirtTexas  
  • Independent4233
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:30am

    She’s just NOT a sexy woman.

    I saw the movie Casino again the other evening and thought to myself that she probably didn’t have to pretend too much in her role as an addict, an alcoholic and a slut. I’m pretty sure the role was pretty much the way she is naturally.

    Report Post »  
  • jhaydeng
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:28am

    blink,blink

    Report Post »  
  • cal_105
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:24am

    Like any good socialist and liberal she thinks that how she lives her life is the only way, and everyone else has to follow her example. That includes the help.

    Report Post »  
  • blanco5
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:23am

    You can raise your kids the way you want to raise them. This idiot actress prefers OTHER people to raise her kids for her. Choose a non-religious nanny next time.

    Report Post »  
  • BLACKDIAMONDSKIER
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:23am

    “Emotional distress” and “mental anguish” are BULL CRAP reasons to file a law suit. These characteristics are abstract claims that cannot be measured. If her claim is proven to be true, it just goes to show you how far tolerance goes among those that promote it…… Hey Sharon, try a cattle prod next time…..it might work better to get your servants to do what they are supposed to do.

    Report Post »  
  • moussiagilda
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:15am

    Hollywood was and is Christian, and didn’t even suspect it until now. Hollywood is divine. Practically every movie I’ve gone to recently, I cry hysterically throughout. Last movie I sobbed through was Hot Tub Time Machine.

    Report Post »  
  • Matrix22
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:12am

    This whole situation is so stupid it hardly deserves notice. The nanny is wrong because, well, give me a break. If it was so bad, quit. And please, “mental anguish” from being mocked about your religion? If that were true, every christian on the planet could sue pretty much everyone in media. On the other hand, Sharon Stone is wrong about…well, pretty much everything. My question to her is, “why adopt 3 boys and then have them raised by not just one, but multiple nanny’s?” Apparently, to her, children are accessories…

    Report Post »  
  • ncwiseguy
    Posted on May 25, 2012 at 8:10am

    she said, she said??

    as the parent/employer, stone has the right do do what she wants relative to the upbringing of her children.

    so what does the ex nanny expect? not to follow the guidelines/rules set out? and what court will invade the home to dictate to parents what they have set out for their kids caretakers.

    another bs lawsuit………….all about $$. judge………..throw it out !!!!

    Report Post »  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love