On Aug. 25, 2017, the plaintiff, a 49-year-old woman who worked for a mortgage broker, learned that a naked photograph of her was sent to a friend by Jacque Jones, a coach for the Washington Nationals baseball team. The woman sued Jones and Jones’ employer, the Washington Nationals Baseball Club LLC. She alleged that Jones’ action was a violation of the California revenge porn law, Civil Code § 1708.85, and constituted negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. She also alleged that the Washington Nationals Baseball Club was negligent in its retention of Jones, as it allegedly knew of Jones’ prior bad conduct with women. Before trial, the plaintiff dismissed most of her causes of action without prejudice, and the matter only continued on her claims regarding the violation of the revenge porn statue. As a result, the Washington Nationals Baseball Club was dismissed from the case with a waiver of costs. The plaintiff claimed that she began an eight-month-long relationship with Jones in January 2017 and that as Jones traveled with the Nationals, he remained in contact with her via email, social media and text messages. She also claimed that Jones asked her to send him naked photos of her, which he assured her would remain private, and that because she felt safe sending them to Jones, she sent around 100 photos of herself. The plaintiff claimed that their relationship started to get bad when Jones started to become controlling and demanding. She also claimed that Jones would get angry with her if she did not do what he wanted and that Jones would send her harassing texts. She claimed that, as result, she decided she wanted to break up with him. The plaintiff claimed that when Jones was in town for a game on Aug. 25, 2017, she refused to see him or go to the baseball game. She also claimed that when Jones saw that she had given the Nationals hats that he had previously given her to a mutual male friend, Jones became angry with her. She claimed that, as a result, when the friend posted a picture of the hats on his Facebook page, Jones responded a few minutes later by sending a message through Facebook Messenger stating, “Ask ya home girl if she wants these back,” and then sent the friend a naked photo of her. The plaintiff asserted that Jones sent the picture without her consent in an attempt to embarrass and humiliate her, and to emotionally devastate her. She further claimed that, in the weeks that followed, Jones distributed the photo to at least one other person and used others to tell her that she should stop talking about Jones or he would send out other photos. Jones admitted that the photo was sent to him by the plaintiff. However, he claimed that the photo only showed someone’s breasts, upper chest and neck, so one would not be able to tell who was in the photo. He further claimed that since the person’s face was not in the photo, he thought it would be OK to send via a private messenger. Defense counsel disputed the extent of Jones’ relationship with the plaintiff, contending that Jones only saw the plaintiff four times in person, during which time they went to a restaurant one time and Jones’ house the other three times. Counsel argued that while there were allegations that Jones was controlling, demanding and/or angry toward women, there was no evidence of that presented at court and that the plaintiff, herself, even claimed that Jones was always a gentleman toward her until he sent the picture. Counsel also argued that Jones did not send the plaintiff harassing texts and that the argument they had over text messaging five days before the incident was mutual. In addition, counsel contended that only one other person saw the photo and that there was evidence that the plaintiff, herself, showed the picture to at least one other person., The plaintiff maintained that she was embarrassed, humiliated and emotionally devastated by Jones’ actions. She claimed that since the day their mutual friend told her what Jones had done and showed her the photo, she has suffered severe emotional distress, embarrassment and even physical manifestations of the pain, including vomiting at the thought of Jones’s actions and the knowledge that at least one private nude photo was shown to others, including a mutual friend. She also claimed that her emotional were also caused by Jones’ threats that he would send out additional photos if she did not stop talking about him. She claimed that she sought treatment for her emotional . The plaintiff claimed that she could no longer work as a result of her condition and that she would be disabled for at least another three years. She also claimed that she will require another three years of therapy. The plaintiff sought recovery of $45,000 in past and future medical costs, $230,000 in lost wages, and $2.5 million in noneconomic damages for past and future emotional pain and suffering. She also sought recovery of punitive damages as a result of Jones’ deliberate behavior. Defense counsel disputed the punitive damages claim, arguing that Jones did not deliberately cause the plaintiff’s alleged emotional distress.