In 2011, the plaintiff, a 7-year-old second-grade student, was molested for the first time by her after-school instructor, Jonathan Avalos. She claimed that Avalos continued to molest her throughout the 2011-12 school year, when she was in second grade, throughout the 2012-13 school year and throughout the 2013-14 school year. On March 27, 2014, the student, then around 10 years old, told the school that Avalos was touching her in her private places. The school sent her back to Avalos’ class and did not report the allegation to the police. Instead, Avalos was allowed to resign in 2014. Avalos has not faced criminal charges. The student sued Avalos; the school district that employed Avalos, Lamont Elementary School District; the operator of the after-school program in conjunction with the school district, the Boys and Girls Club of Kern County; the after-school coordinator for the Boys and Girls Club, Renee Stancil; and the after-school coordinator for the school district, Cherie Olgin. The plaintiff alleged that Avalos’ actions constituted sexual assault. She also alleged that the remaining defendants were negligent in their supervision of their staff and students, in their retention of Avalos, and in their protection of the students. The plaintiff claimed that Avalos told her that she would “get it” before molesting her for the first time and that he continued to molest her for three school years. She also claimed that when she reported Avalos’ behavior to the school in March 2014, it sent her back to Avalos’ class without reporting the complaint to the police. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that the school district had written reports about Avalos’ inappropriate behavior since May 2006. Counsel also contended that the Boys and Girls Club partnered with the school district to run the after-school program during the 2009-10 school year, but that the Boys and Girls Club failed to conduct reference and background checks on Avalos. Counsel further contended that the Boys and Girls Club received written reports regarding Avalos’ inappropriate behavior toward female students since 2010 and that the individual coordinators of the after-school program each received numerous reports about Avalos’ behavior in other, prior alleged instances. However, plaintiff’s counsel argued that even after the plaintiff complained about Avalos in March 2014, the school sent her back to Avalos’ class without reporting the complaint to the police, as the school district was required to as a mandated reporter. Counsel argued that, instead, the school district transferred Avalos a number of times between the grade school and middle school and that the school district only warned Avalos to stop the inappropriate behavior. Counsel asserted that, ultimately, Avalos was allowed to resign in 2014. The school district and the Boys and Girls Club admitted liability. They agreed that Avalos was in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the alleged incidents and that Avalos harmed the plaintiff. However, the district and the Boys and Girls Club continued to contest the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s alleged harm. Avalos contested the sexual-assault allegations, denying both the plaintiff’s claims and those from the prior alleged instances. He contended that all of the allegations were fabricated., The plaintiff claimed that she was sexually assaulted several times over the course of three school years, when she was between the ages of 7 and 10. She claimed that as a result, she suffers from emotional distress. The plaintiff’s expert child psychologist testified that she diagnosed the plaintiff with post-traumatic stress disorder. She also opined that the plaintiff would have PTSD on an ongoing basis for the rest of her life and that it would recur at different times, such as rites of passage. The plaintiff waived all of her economic damages, and sought recovery of noneconomic damages for her past and future emotional pain and suffering. She also sought recovery of punitive damages against Avalos for his alleged continuous acts in conscious disregard for her right to safety, despite Avalos being allegedly warned by the school district to stop his behavior. In total, plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury to award the plaintiff $10 million. Counsel for the school district and the Boys and Girls Club contested the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s alleged harm. Avalos’ counsel argued that the plaintiff was not sexually assaulted and that the plaintiff does not suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Counsel argued that, instead, the plaintiff had an unspecified anxiety disorder that was unrelated to anything Avalos allegedly did or did not do.