In April 2016, plaintiffs Mike Berg and Karen Doughty, Berg’s wife, filed a claim with their insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., because of mold and moisture damage to their personal property in a raised foundation house that they were renting in San Diego. A few weeks later, Liberty Mutual denied their claim in full. However, eight months later, after the city of San Diego found that the mold was caused by a faulty metal hose connected to the house’s clothes dryer, Liberty Mutual paid Berg and Doughty $5,000. Berg and Doughty sued Liberty Mutual, alleging that its actions constituted bad faith. The plaintiffs’ expert in air quality testing testified that there were openings in the clothes dryer’s metal exhaust hose, which went under the house. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Doughty would wonder why clothes in the dryer were not drying, so she would continuously use the clothes dryer in the attempt to dry them, which caused moisture to build up. Counsel further contended that humidity from the dryer caused the resulting moisture and mold inside the house. The plaintiffs’ bad faith expert opined that there was an insufficient investigation and that if Liberty Mutual investigated the damage properly, it would have found that the clothes dryer was the cause. The expert also opined that there was a delay in providing the benefits of $5,000 and that the benefits provided was insufficient. Defense counsel denied that the cause of the mold and moisture was from the clothes dryer. Instead, counsel contended that the cause of the excessive moisture in the home was from improper drainage of water, such as rain water, from the exterior of the house. Defense counsel argued that the improper drainage caused high humidity inside the house and that this cause was excluded from coverage under Berg and Doughty’s policy. In response, plaintiffs’ counsel argued that due to the location of the house in San Diego and the desert-like climate, it was unlikely that there would be excessive rain water outside of the house., Doughty testified that she was humiliated going to her office job wearing suits that smelled like mold and that she also heard people talking about it behind her back. She alleged that as a result, both her and her husband suffered anxiety, depression and emotional distress, which caused hardship to their work and marriage. Berg and Doughty sought recovery of $120,000 for their policy benefits and emotional distress. They also initially sought recovery of punitive damages, but the judge removed the claim.