In 1999, plaintiff Jerilyn Marin, 35, joined the El Monte police force and, at various times, served as a member of the Mounted Enforcement Detail, Burglary Detail, an observer in the helicopter division and a field training officer. On April 2, 2007, she was promoted to detective, but was later reprimanded, placed on a performance plan and eventually demoted from the detective position. Marin claimed that she was subjected to sexual harassment by Sergeant Al Tromp and other officers since joining the police force. She also claimed that when she complained about the harassment, she was retaliated against by being unfairly reprimanded, placed on an unwarranted performance plan and eventually demoted. Marin sued Tromp and his employers, the El Monte Police Department and the city of El Monte. She alleged that Tromp sexually harassed and retaliated against her, and that the city and police departments failure to address these actions created a hostile work environment. Marin claimed that she was a valued employee, and was ultimately promoted to detective as a result of her good performance and hard work. However, she claimed since almost the start of her employment Tromp and other officers would sexually harass her by making inappropriate remarks and by staring at her breasts. In addition, Marin contended that Tromp suggested he would grant her time off in exchange for sexual favors and would comment on her body, including remarking on how her posterior looked in certain pants. She also contended that Tromp made derogatory remarks about women in general, including stating things such as “a women’s place is in the home.” Marin claimed that she complained to supervisors and other officers on numerous occasions about the sexual harassment she was subjected to, but her complaints were dismissed and she was told that it was just “Tromp being Tromp.” She further claimed that on Nov. 17, 2008, she complained once again about the harassment, but four days later, on Nov. 21, 2008, Tromp called her into his office, berated her and told her that her career would be affected “greatly” by the complaints. Marin alleged that shortly thereafter, she was placed on a performance plan and then demoted from detective. The city and police department disputed the plaintiff’s allegations and argued that the claims of retaliation only surfaced after Marin was demoted. The defendants also claimed that the police force has zero tolerance for harassment and that Tromp was promptly disciplined after the allegations were reported. In addition, the defendants claimed that Marin’s reassignment was made because of budget cuts and staffing needs., Marin is still employed by the police force, but she claimed that she suffered emotional distress as a result of the incident. She also claimed she suffered a loss of earnings as a result of the demotion, as well as suffered a decrease in career opportunities. Thus, Marin sought recovery of up to $7 million in damages for her emotional distress, decreased career opportunities and lost wages.