In 2007, plaintiff Delco Hagan, 16, an eighth grade boarding student and cadet at Army and Navy Academy, in Carlsbad, was supervised by Juan Munoz, a Teacher, Advisor, and Counselor (TAC) Officer with Army and Navy Academy. One night, Munoz took Delco off-campus to buy alcohol and then took Delco back to Munoz’ living quarters, where Munoz allegedly plied Delco with alcohol. Later, in the fall of 2007, after talking to his older brother, who was also cadet at the school, a younger student came forward to report that Munoz had fondled him. The boy’s older brother suggested that they tell supervisors what happened, and the boy and his brother told a supervisor on campus, who started an internal investigation. The investigation included 20 other cadets, and a report was given to the superintendent of the school on a Friday, Sept. 28, 2007. As a result, Munoz was sent home and then removed from campus over the weekend. Child Protective Services then made a written report the next Monday, and the police started investigating other alleged incidents. After hearing of another scandal at the school, Delco claimed that he was assaulted by Munoz one night prior to the fall of 2007 and that had been sexually harassed by Munoz since 2004. Delco sued Munoz and Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, California. Delco alleged that Munoz’s actions constituted sexual harassment and sexual battery (pursuant to Civil Code § 51.9). He also alleged that Army and Navy Academy was negligent in the supervision and retention of Munoz. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that when Delco initially reported his experience after hearing about the other boy in the fall of 2007, Delco did not disclose the full abuse. Counsel contended that Delco was then able to disclose another part of the abuse in around 2013, after which Delco’s father encouraged him to start therapy. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that as a result, Delco was finally able to disclose the attempted sodomy that had occurred. Delco claimed that on the subject night in 2007, Munoz took him off-campus to buy alcohol, returned him to Munoz’ living quarters, and plied him with alcohol. He claimed that Munoz then performed oral copulation on him and attempted to sodomize him. Delco further claimed that after that night, Munoz continued to enter his living quarters, caress his head, and play with his ears in the dark. Delco claimed that even before the subject event, Munoz would come into his living quarters after hours and proceed to caress his head and speak with him for extended periods of time. He further claimed that Munoz would wrestle with him in his room and would also frequently engage in wrestling matches with other cadets in their rooms. In addition, Delco claimed that Munoz would take him off-campus in Munoz’s personal vehicle and that Munoz would inappropriately play a game of “cup-check” with the cadets on-campus, whereby Munoz would hit cadets in the genitals. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that at the time Delco was in attendance at Army and Navy Academy, the school had up to 350 students, with 300 of those being boarding students, but that there were red flags the school should have seen. Specifically, counsel contended that around the time when Munoz started, there was a younger boy in the lower school that was not supervised by Munoz, but was, nonetheless, always with Munoz. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that there was an incident on a bus trip in which an older boy called the younger one a “rape toy” and that as result, the younger boy told a supervisor on the bus about being called a “rape toy.” However, plaintiff’s counsel contended that the supervisor did not probe as to the reason behind the incident. In addition, plaintiff’s counsel contended that Munoz would take students to his room and give them alcohol, as Munoz allegedly did with Delco since 2004, and that two other victims claimed that Munoz had fondled them since at least 2005. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that when Army and Navy Academy fired Munoz, it stated that Munoz was let go because he was giving cadets alcohol, but that the school did not mention any abuse. Counsel also noted that although Child Protective Services made a written report, it was never produced and no one could explain what happened to it. In addition, plaintiff’s counsel contended that after Munoz was removed from his position, the school put Munoz in a Motel 6 for a month. However, counsel contended that during that time, the younger boy who reported Munoz in the fall of 2007 (after the boy told his older brother about Munoz’s behavior) claimed he would continue to go see Munoz at the hotel. However, when the young boy was deposed before trial, he recounted that Munoz kissed him on the lips and rubbed his head at night, but did not disclose fondling or oral copulation. The plaintiff’s standard-of-care expert opined that it fell below the standard of care to only have two to three adults supervise the boarding students at night. The expert also opined that there should have been more adults on campus and that the supervisors should have been better trained. Defense counsel contended that Delco graduated from the academy and that he never reported to anybody that he was molested until 2013. Counsel also contended that Delco never mentioned attempted sodomy until 2016. Thus, defense counsel argued that the alleged sexual abuse never happened. Counsel for Army and Navy Academy argued that the school acted within the standard of care, trusted Munoz, and properly supervised Munoz. Specifically, counsel contended that in 2007, when another student reported that he was given alcohol by Munoz, Army and Navy Academy properly fired Munoz and had the police start an investigation. Defense counsel contended that only after Munoz was fired did two students come forward and claim that Munoz fondled them outside their clothes or blanket. In addition, defense counsel noted that there were inconsistencies with Delco’s claims. Specifically, counsel contended that Delco told police that Munoz took him to his room, gave him alcohol, and asked him to stay the night, but that Delco told the police detective that he did not stay. In addition, counsel contended that although Delco testified that he was asleep and woke up to being orally copulated, Delco later claimed that he woke up to Munoz attempting sodomy on him., Delco claimed that he was sexually assaulted and sexually harassed. He alleged that since he did not disclose the full abuse when he initially reported it, he did not seek counseling at that time. He claimed that his father only encouraged him to start therapy in around 2013, after he was able to disclose another part of the abuse. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Delco was sent to the school with the hope that he would have structure and discipline, and that Delco would succeed later in life. However, counsel argued that the impactful experience was harmful. The plaintiff’s psychiatry expert and Delco’s treating doctor both opined that as a result of the sexual abuse by Munoz, Delco suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. The plaintiff’s vocational rehabilitation expert opined that the sexual abuse adversely impacted Delco’s ability to obtain future employment and caused a future loss in lifetime earnings. The expert also opined that the experience would hinder Delco and affect his ability to manage people. Specifically, the expert opined that since Munoz was in a position of control, trust and supervision of Delco, such as a boss, when the molestation happened, Delco’s control and trust issues were impacted. The vocational rehabilitation expert further opined that as a result, the incidents affected Delco emotionally, as well as affected his ability to interact in work situations. Thus, Delco sought recovery of past and future medical costs, future loss of earnings, and past and future non-economic loss for his past and future emotional pain and suffering. In addition, Delco sought recovery of punitive damages against Munoz for his conduct. Defense counsel denied that Delco was sexually assaulted or sexually harassed, noting that Delco never reported to anybody that he was molested until 2013 and never mentioned any attempted sodomy until 2016. Counsel also questioned whether the alleged incidents affected Delco negatively, noting that Delco was still able to graduate from the academy. The defense’s expert psychiatrist disputed causation and opined that Delco’s emotional injuries were due to pre-existing issues. The expert also opined that the future care that Delco asserted was little high and that, instead, Delco would only need 40 to 80 sessions of therapy to be better.