Sharon Stone, scene here in a clip of the movie Basic-Instinct 2, is facing charges of "abuse" in a Los Angeles court filed by a Filipina nanny.

By Nimfa U. Rueda

LOS ANGELES, California – Filipino nanny Erlinda Elemen is “very eager” to face her former employer, Hollywood actress Sharon Stone, in court and disprove that she lied about her claims in the lawsuit she had filed against the movie star.

“(Elemen) is very eager to put this in front of a jury,” Eric Rose, Elemen’s spokesman, told this reporter yesterday (Saturday in Manila). Rose was reacting to Stone’s statement calling Elemen “a disgruntled ex-employee who is obviously looking to get money any way she can.”

Elemen filed a nine-page civil complaint Wednesday accusing Stone of violating labor laws and making derogatory comments about her Filipino heritage.

In her lawsuit, Elemen claimed that the actress had called Filipinos “stupid” and warned her not to speak in front of the children so they would not “talk like her.”

Stone called it “a frivolous lawsuit for absurd claims that are made-up and fabricated.”

When asked for comment about Stone’s statement, Elemen’s lawyer, Solomon Gresen yesterday  said “the complaint stands and we’ll pursue it vigorously.”

“I’ve done my homework,” Gresen told this reporter. “We are prepared to pursue this all the way through trial. We believe that the evidence will support Ms. Elemen’s claims.”

Elemen also claimed that she was not only ridiculed because of her background, but also her strong religious beliefs. She was allegedly told by the actress that she couldn’t read her bible in the house.

Elemen, who worked more than four years as a live-in nanny to Stone’s children, is asking for unpaid wages, damages and penalties.

In the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Elemen said she was fired in February 2011 because she refused to give back overtime pay that Stone told her she did not deserve.

Stone told her it was only in January 2011 that she learned from her accountant that she was paying her overtime when she worked holidays or traveled to care for her three children, the lawsuit said.

“Defendant Stone, however, accused Plaintiff of ‘stealing’ from her by taking the above-described overtime pay, told Plaintiff that it was ‘illegal’ for Plaintiff to have taken the pay, and asked for it back,” the suit said.

Elemen refused to give the overtime pay back, arguing it was required by state and federal labor laws, the suit said.