In 2009, plaintiff Jack Qin, a Chinese businessman who lived in the Inland Empire/Roland Heights area of Los Angeles, was looking to buy a house. He owned a Chinese restaurant in the area and established himself by the connections he made in the community. At a dinner event, Qin met two individuals, one of whom was a real estate agent with a license and the other was Jenny Xu, who worked in mortgages. The agent was ultimately able to find a house for Qin, and Qin gave the agent commission on that house. However, Xu felt the agent should share the commission with her because she allegedly helped the agent locate the house, so she asked Qin to convince the agent to do so. Qin refused. In late 2010, Xu went to the police to report that Qin had sexually battered her about a year before. However, the police never investigated the alleged incident. Shortly thereafter, Qin’s friends and business acquaintances learned of Xu’s claims about Qin. Qin sued Xu, alleging that the defendant’s actions constituted defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Qin claimed that Xu approached him in late 2010 and told him that she would ruin his reputation unless he made the real estate agent give her part of the commission. He claimed that when he refused, Xu fabricated a story about sexual battery and told people in the community that he was the perpetrator. Xu denied ever telling Qin’s friends and business acquaintances about the alleged sexual battery. However, she contended that Qin did sexually batter her., Qin claimed he suffered damage to his reputation from Xu’s defamatory statements, causing him to suffer emotional distress. Thus, Qin sought recovery of presumed damages for the intentional infliction of emotional distress and for the defamation per se. He also sought recovery of punitive damages. Defense counsel argued that even if the statements were made by Xu, it was not a big deal and/or harm to Qin. In regard to punitive damages, counsel contended that Xu could not afford to pay what Qin was seeking.