On May 18, 2008, plaintiffs Nancy Barsotti, Martin Beltran, Desmond Cotter, David Dawley, Paul Gallegos, Alan Harvey, Warren House, Ricky Hui, Tomie Ann Kato, James Kimball, Barry Lo, Colin Mackenzie, David Maxion, Mark Nicholas, Michael Orlando, George Petty III, Romelia Scott, Ellen Stein and Richard Stevens, San Francisco Fire Department employees 40 years of age or older, claimed that an examination they took, which was given by the H-20 Lieutenant, a working supervisor who commands a firefighting company, was discriminatory based on age. Barsotti, Beltran, Cotter, Dawley, Gallegos, Harvey, House, Hui, Kato, Kimball, Lo, Mackenzie, Maxion, Nicholas, Orlando, Petty, Scott, Stein and Stevens sued their employer, the city and county of San Francisco; the San Francisco Fire Department; the person in charge of the examination unit that created, administered and scored the exam, David Johnson; The Civil Service Commission of San Francisco; and the San Francisco Fire Commission. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted age discrimination and/or failure to prevent discrimination. Kato withdrew from the case and dismissed her claim without compensation. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that many of the plaintiffs were temporary lieutenants for years before taking the exam and that although the plaintiffs and other candidates who were age 40 and over had extensive experience and studied extensively, they did poorly on the exam compared to those who were under 40 and had less experience. Counsel asserted that the subject exam was discriminatory because older firefighters, like the plaintiffs, were trained to use verbal methods to communicate fire-ground tactics and communications, but the exam was not administered orally. Defense counsel asserted that there was no discrimination in the test and that the plaintiffs had time to prepare., The plaintiffs sought recovery of their loss of earnings and benefits, as well as damages for their pain and suffering based on their emotional distress.