In March 2015, plaintiff Lysanne Ryan, 58, a guest services attendant, started her employment at a religious camp and retreat commonly referred to as the Oak Glen Christian Conference Center, in Yucaipa. At that time, the camp was owned and operated by The Free Methodist Church in Southern California. Ryan and her husband previously accepted employment offers from the camp’s on-site director, Jerome Winn, and then moved from Michigan to California in March 2015. They completed their 90-day introductory periods, after which neither Ryan nor her husband received employer-provided health insurance. In December 2015, the camp sold to another entity, Oak Glen Christian Conference Center, LLC, in December 2015. Winn remained as an executive director, but Ryan was still not provided health insurance. Around the approximate time of the sale, Ryan suffered a series of illnesses that required a series of medical leaves. Over the course of time, she stopped providing Winn with notes excusing her absence. While she claimed she possessed such notes, she indicated that she was too sick to provide them. Ryan also claimed that she should have been offered a light duty assignment working from home. Ryan was ultimately terminated from her position when she did not return from her medical leave as expected. Ryan sued Winn; the camp’s previous owner, The Free Methodist Church in Southern California; and the camp’s new owner, Oak Glen Christian Conference Center, LLC. Ryan alleged that Winn lured her to move to California based on a false promise of health insurance, in violation of Labor Code § 970, claiming. She also alleged Winn’s actions constituted religion and creed harassment and that the camp’s owners were liable for Winn’s actions. Ryan further alleged that Glen Christian Conference Center’s actions constituted disability discrimination, a failure to accommodate, a failure to engage in the interactive process, and other related employment negligence. The trial was to be conducted in three phases. The first phase was to address whether The Free Methodist Church in Southern California was liable to Ryan for alleged promises of health insurance. The second phase was to address Ryan’s allegations of discrimination, harassment and wrongful termination against Winn and the subsequent owner of the camp, Oak Glen Christian Conference Center. The third phase was to address the issue of damages, in the event liability was found in either of the first two phases. At trial, Winn and other witnesses testified that health insurance was not provided to any staff at the camp as a benefit of employment. However, Ryan and her husband testified that they had reached a "secret" side deal with Winn to the contrary and that as a result, Winn formally offered employment to Ryan and her husband in February 2015. Ryan and her husband’s offer was memorialized in writing, and included free on-site housing, a utility allowance and agreed-upon hourly wages. The offer letter also referenced "eligibility" for a benefit package after completion of a 90-day introductory period. Defense counsel contended that Ryan and her husband did not ask any questions about the meaning of the "eligibility" phrase in the employment contract and that Ryan and her husband just assumed it referred to health insurance. Winn testified that the only benefits offered were in the form of vacation time and other items outlined in the employee handbook – but not health insurance. Specifically, Winn claimed that as The Free Methodist Church in Southern California evolved since its inception, the need for the camp waned and, in approximately 2011, The Free Methodist Church in Southern California decided to put the camp up for sale. Winn noted that one of the financial changes made at the camp was to eliminate employer-offered health insurance benefits in exchange for an increase in wages offered to the employees. Thus, defense counsel contended that The Free Methodist Church in Southern California no longer offered staff health insurance as a benefit of employment as of approximately 2011. Defense counsel noted that it was undisputed that over the course of the interviews with Ryan and her husband in January 2015, Winn informed the couple that the camp was for sale and that emails were exchanged indicating that Ryan knew there was no guarantee of continued employment in the event of a sale. In addition, Winn testified that he informed both Ryan and her husband that health insurance was not offered by the camp, but Ryan and her husband dispute that allegation., The trial was bifurcated. Damages were not before the court. Ryan alleged that the lack of health insurance complicated treatment for a chronic pulmonary condition that she had. She claimed that as a result, she suffered emotional distress. Ryan sought recovery of past and future economic damages, and past and future general damages for emotional pain and suffering. She claimed that as a result of her complicated medical condition, she was entitled to more than $4 million in damages from The Free Methodist Church in Southern California.