In 2004, plaintiff Wendy Giron was hired as a hostess for The Polo Lounge, an on-site restaurant at The Beverly Hills Hotel. Giron and another hostess, plaintiff Kelley Morales, claimed that they were sexually harassed by the general manager of the hotel, Alberto del Hoyo, every day up until they left their positions in 2010. Plaintiff Robert Sulatycky, the regional director of culinary food and beverage operations at the hotel, claimed that he was also subjected to a sexually charged, racially charged work environment at the hotel. He alleged that he ultimately quit his position in 2010 because he was subjected to racist and sexist comments from Del Hoyo. Plaintiff Nino O’Brien, a sommelier (or wine steward), legally changed his name from Nino Chadha to Nino Shamrock O’Brien in 2008. He claimed the hotel gave him a hard time about his name change, causing him to be discriminated against. He also claimed he was subjected to sexually inappropriate banter in the restaurant amongst the employees and his immediate supervisor, Micah Paloff. In 2011, plaintiff Tim Dupree, a director of sales, complained about a subordinate’s allegedly difficult behavior. However, he claimed that because the subordinate was in an inappropriate relationship with del Hoyo, he was retaliated against, causing him to be terminated form his position. Giron, Morales, Sulatycky, O’Brien and Dupree sued del Hoyo; Paloff; and the believed operators of The Beverly Hills Hotel, Sajahtera Inc. and Beverly Hills Hotel Corp. The plaintiffs alleged that the actions of the hotel and its managers constituted discrimination, retaliation, national origin discrimination, harassment, and sexual battery. Morales ultimately settled out of the case, and Sulatycky was dismissed on summary judgment. In addition, Paloff settled out of the case and Beverly Hills Hotel Corp. was dismissed, as it was determined that the corporation was not the proper defendant. Thus, the matter continued with the claims of Giron, Dupree and O’Brien against Sajahtera Inc. and del Hoyo. Giron claimed that since she began her position in 2004, del Hoyo came in for lunch every day and would stop to greet the hostesses. However, she claimed that del Hoyo would greet the hostesses by putting his hand on their forearms and then graze the hostesses’ breasts when he retracted his hand. Thus, she claimed that del Hoyo’s actions constituted sexual battery. However, Giron admitted that she left her position in 2010 without ever making a complaint about del Hoyo. (Morales, who previously settled, had also made the same claim and had also never previously complained about del Hoyo.) O’Brien, who is of Indian and Irish ancestry, explained that he was raised in India, learned that he had Irish ancestry through his father, and legally changed his name from Nino Chadha to Nino Shamrock O’Brien in 2008. However, he claimed that the hotel gave him a hard time about his name change and that remarks were made to him about being Irish and/or Indian, including being called a “Black Leprechaun.” O’Brien also claimed that though he was not gay, he was teased for being a homosexual and was subjected to slurs. He further claimed he was subjected to sexually inappropriate banter in the restaurant amongst the employees and Paloff. In addition, O’Brien claimed that he was a victim of a joke on April 1, 2011, when Paloff told him that a VIP guest complained about his cologne and that he would be suspended pending an investigation of the complaint. He alleged that he was then told that it was an April Fools’ joke. Thus, he alleged that the actions of Paloff and the hotel constituted harassment and discrimination, national origin discrimination, and perceived sexual orientation discrimination. He further alleged that the hotel failed to prevent harassment and discrimination from occurring. Dupree claimed that he was terminated from his position in 2011, after he complained about the difficult behavior of a subordinate of his who was allegedly in an inappropriate relationship with del Hoyo. Thus, he claimed he was terminated for making the complaints, and sued for sexual harassment and discrimination, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, and failure to prevent harassment and discrimination from occurring. Defense counsel argued that although del Hoyo had old-style, European mannerisms and was a welcoming individual, none of what Giron or Morales claimed occurred. In fact, counsel contended that neither Giron nor Morales ever complained about del Hoyo’s alleged actions while they worked at the hotel, and current and former hostesses testified that they had no complaints about del Hoyo and disputed any such inappropriate behavior. In addition, counsel noted that the testimonies reported that del Hoyo had a regular table at the restaurant, depending on the season, and that del Hoyo would not greet the hostesses, but, instead, go directly to his table. In regard to O’Brien’s claims, defense counsel contended that although the April Fools’ joke did happen, it lasted five to 10 seconds and that as a result of the joke, Paloff was terminated from his position and other participants were disciplined. However, counsel asserted that the incident was not severe or pervasive. Defense counsel also asserted that the alleged sexually inappropriate banter was from O’Brien and that there was no inappropriate banter directed toward him. Specifically, testimony from employees revealed that O’Brien was known for commenting on Paloff’s appearance and that O’Brien often commented on Paloff’s blue eyes and would say, “What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.” In addition, employees testified that O’Brien allegedly had a photo on his phone of Paloff and that O’Brien would mention sleeping with it under his pillow. In addition, defense counsel asserted that Dupree was terminated from his position for a legitimate business reason. Specifically, counsel contended that Dupree was terminated due to his poor performance., Giron, O’Brien and Dupree claimed that they suffered emotional distress as a result of the hotel’s actions. Giron and Dupree did not seek any counseling for the alleged emotional distress and both claimed that they had no plans to seek treatment. Dupree also sought recovery for his loss earnings as a result of his termination. O’Brien claimed that later in the month after the incident with the April Fools’ joke, he produced a note stating that he was suffering from work-related stress, was treating with a physician, and would have to be off work on disability from April 26, 2011 onward. He then started treating with a marriage and family therapist, who he continued to see as of the date of trial. O’Brien subsequently remained on stress disability until January 2012. O’Brien’s therapist opined that O’Brien suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder from the subject April Fools’ incident. The therapist also testified that the subject incident was the first thing that O’Brien mentioned to him in their meetings in April 2011. Thus, Giron, O’Brien and Dupree sought recovery of $12.5 million in total damages. Defense counsel presented testimony and notes from O’Brien’s therapist that allegedly showed that O’Brien did not bring up the subject April Fools’ incident until November 2013, 1.5 years after the incident occurred. Counsel contended that the notes and testimony showed that O’Brien was treating for other conditions, including a fear of driving.