KBK files suit against Kaiser and its employee accused of secretly recording nurses in the nude
A Kaiser Permanente maternity ward restroom. An unmarked iPhone concealed in an unassuming box of examination gloves—its memory card full. One hospital staffer’s disturbing discovery ultimately reveals dozens of victims, recorded in their most private moments.
And now, a fight to hold the accused voyeur – and the Golden State’s largest healthcare provider – accountable for the invasion.
Kabateck LLP, in partnership with Steele Cooper Law, has filed suit on behalf of four women – identified as Jane Does 1, 2, 3, and 4 – all dedicated Kaiser nurses who allege they were recorded while using the restroom at their work in the maternity ward of Kaiser Vallejo.
This group represents just a fraction of what court papers show were well over 30 victims of an extremely violating form of sexual harassment.
The complaint, filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Solano, names Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, The Permanente Medical Group, and former Kaiser employee Randolph Villacrusis. The suit alleges that Villacrusis secretly recorded staffers, including the nurses, in the nude in private employee restrooms and female locker rooms at Kaiser’s Vallejo facility, and that Kaiser leadership failed to take adequate measures to prevent and remedy the situation upon the disturbing discovery.
In April 2026, Villacrusis, 39, a former member of the medical supplies staff at Kaiser Vallejo, was arrested on criminal charges: 2 felony counts of eavesdropping and 35 misdemeanor counts for using a concealed smartphone to secretly photograph and/or record individuals using a restroom. At his arraignment, Villacrusis was ordered to stay away from the alleged victims and the hospital itself (except to receive medical care). He was released on $50,000 bond.
The criminal charges against Villacrusis address alleged misconduct spanning 2023-2025, but civil suits claim the secret recording went on considerably longer – beginning in 2021, four years before the first concealed iPhone was discovered.
According to reporting by Open Vallejo, on June 23, 2025, a Kaiser OB tech using a restroom in the maternal and child health unit noticed a box of examination gloves positioned atop a chest of drawers, facing the stall, and a red light glowing inside. Opening the suspicious box, she found it contained a red iPhone with 20% battery remaining and its memory full.
Alarmed, the woman took the smartphone to supervisors, who alerted security. Security confiscated the phone and powered it down. Although numerous staffers requested that law enforcement be called immediately, Kaiser stalled. Finally, the OB tech called the police herself.
Several similar boxes, with pinholes punched in them, and at least one with a handwritten note scribbled on the box, reading “please keep here. thnx,” were subsequently discovered in other facility restrooms and locker rooms by police, but without recording devices currently inside.
When Villacrusis was arrested, a Kaiser spokesperson said that no patients were affected and that Vallejo police had contacted most of the victims.
Around the time of Villacrusis’s arraignment, six women also filed civil lawsuits, accusing Villacrusis of harassment, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and alleging that the hospital system had failed to properly investigate or take reasonable preventative measures.
“Despite the discovery, Kaiser failed to take prompt and appropriate remedial action,” the first lawsuit read. Both the new and previously filed suits accuse Kaiser of being slow to act, downplaying the seriousness and scope of the problem, and grossly inadequately communicating with employees regarding the incident.
According to Mercury News, the earlier lawsuits claim “Kaiser ‘distributed a brief, vague and perfunctory memorandum to employees’ that didn’t identify ‘the specific restroom where the recording device had been placed, the building or department where the misconduct occurred or the extent of the unlawful recordings.’”
Court records indicate that Villacrusis was not terminated by Kaiser until six months after the first hidden camera was found, and multiple claimants say they only learned they had been recorded when authorities contacted them in February 2026, eight months into the investigation.
According to KBK’s filing, red flags about Villacrusis were present throughout and were negligently ignored by Kaiser.
As a medical supplies manager, Villacrusis had questionable levels of access to spaces ordinarily used only by women; in fact, a member of the cleaning staff had already noted the unusual placement of the glove boxes and tried to dispose of them, but was “told by agents of Kaiser to leave them in place,” the suit says. “Simply put, a reasonably diligent employer should have discovered the cameras, especially considering that they were placed by a male employee/supervisor in areas primarily (or exclusively) accessed by women.”
“These nurses dedicate their lives to caring for others, and they should never have had to question whether they were safe and protected in their own workplace,” said Shant Karnikian, Managing Partner of Kabateck LLP. “What happened to these women was a profound violation of their privacy, dignity and sense of security.”
Unfortunately, this problem does not appear to be isolated to Kaiser in Vallejo. According to CBS News, in January 2026, “Employees at the Kaiser Permanente Hospital in West Los Angeles made the shocking discovery of a hidden camera in a staff-only bathroom” and are suing the hospital.
“Our clients are seeking accountability, not only for the person accused of committing these acts, but for the failures that allowed this conduct to continue and for the answers and protections they deserved from the institution they trusted,” added Karnikian.
The plaintiff’s legal team includes attorneys Brian S. Kabateck, Marina R. Pacheco, and Alina S. Vulic of Kabateck LLP, along with co-counsel Alexandra Steele Cooper and Jarryd Cooper of Steele Cooper Law. The case is Jane Doe 1, et al. v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, et al., No. CU26-05172.