From January 2010 to August 2010, plaintiff James Ruffin worked for State Wide Towing as a tow truck driver who would tow tractor-trailer-type vehicles off of state roads. During that time, the manager of State Wide Towing, Chris Kirk, and the owner of State Wide Towing, Tamila Kirk, allowed Ruffin to move his five-wheel trailer and pickup truck onto State Wide’s tow yard, and let Ruffin live there in his trailer with access to water and electricity for $50 per week out of Ruffin’s paycheck. However, Ruffin acknowledged that his trailer and pickup truck were not registered in his name, even though he paid for both, as there were complications in getting the title transferred to California. Ruffin claimed that on Aug. 19, 2010, Mr. Kirk asked him to go on a tow even though he had already worked 10 hours in the last 24 hours. He claimed that when he informed Mr. Kirk that he could not go on the tow based on the amount of hours already worked, Mr. Kirk fired him on the spot. Subsequently, a week later, on his last day of employment, Ruffin went to the company’s office in order to turn in his uniform and get a $500 refund. However, Ruffin claimed that the office was hesitant to return his money. He also claimed that Mr. Kirk and other individuals then left the office to go to the tow yard and pull his trailer from his truck even though he already had his trailer and truck ready to move. Ruffin claimed that as a result, Mr. Kirk and the other individuals took a metal chain and wrapped it around the trailer hitch and linked the other side of the chain to the back of a State Wide tow truck. He further claimed that while this happened, he was held to the ground by one of the individuals, based on Mr. Kirk’s orders, so that he could not interfere. Ruffin claimed that his trailer was then dragged out of the yard by State Wide’s tow truck, causing the landing legs on his trailer to bend backward, and dropped off at a neighboring tow yard, which was owned by another tow yard owner. Ruffian claimed he suffered a few bumps and bruises from being held down. Ruffin sued Mr. Kirk, Mrs. Kirk and State Wide Towing’s operator, Statewide Towing and Recovery Inc. Ruffin alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted a breach of contract, conversion, assault and battery, forcible entry and detainer, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of California Vehicle Code § 22658 for private tows. He also alleged that the defendants violated the California Labor Code for unpaid overtime and meal breaks. The defendants were granted a directed verdict of the plaintiff’s claims of negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress and violations of the California Vehicle Code. The court also ruled that forcible entry and detainer did not apply to Ruffin’s trailer, as it only applied to houses that were on the ground and stationary. In addition, the plaintiff’s meal breaks claim was dismissed by the Brinker case. As such, the matter only continued on the claims of overtime wages, assault, battery, breach of contract and conversion. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Mr. Kirk violated the rental agreement, which allowed Ruffin to keep his trailer in State Wide’s tow yard, by removing the trailer before the time was up, as Ruffin had paid for the week his trailer was removed. Counsel also contended that Ruffin was entitled payment for 620 overtime hours. In addition, counsel contended that the act of holding down Ruffin and causing constituted assault and battery. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that the neighboring tow yard owner initially claimed that Ruffin’s trailer was placed at least 30 feet from his recreational vehicle and that the landing legs on Ruffin’s trailer were on a block of wood. However, counsel noted that during cross-examination, after being shown a cell phone video that Ruffin took, the neighboring tow yard owner admitted that Ruffin’s trailer was placed next to his RV in order to prevent Ruffin from removing it and admitted that the landing legs of Ruffin’s trailer were bent., Ruffin claimed he suffered bumps and bruises from being held down, but he did not seek medical treatment for them and they all resolved. He also claimed emotional distress from the subject incident, as he felt helpless as he traumatically watched his trailer containing all of his worldly possessions being led away without a chance to stop the process. In addition, he claimed that his trailer could not be claimed easily, as he did not have the title in his name, the landing legs were bent backwards and it was located 200-300 yards away on the neighboring tow yard owner’s private property, next to the tow yard owner’s RV. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that the neighboring tow yard owner and Mr. Kirk were friends, further complicating Ruffin’s ability to recover his trailer. Thus, Ruffin asserted that he suffered consequential damages as a result of his trailer being towed away and the difficulties he had in recovering it. Ruffin also claimed he was owed for the 620 hours of overtime that he worked. Thus, he sought recovery of $39,000 in overtime wages. Defense counsel denied that Ruffin suffered any emotional distress from the incident and argued that all Ruffin’s physical had resolved. Thus, counsel argued that Ruffin was not entitled to consequential damages resulting from the alleged incident. In addition, defense counsel argued that Ruffin’s only real damages would be for unpaid wages, but that it would only be for one day out of 7 days of a $50 week.