Between August 2010 and January 2011, the plaintiffs, four females between the ages of 4 and 7, along with over a dozen other minor females were molested by Keith Woodhouse, as determined by a San Jose Police Department investigation, while Woodhouse was working as an assistant teacher’s aide at Child Development Inc.’s Trace Child Development Center in San Jose. Woodhouse previously worked at First Baptist Church of San Jose’s Church on the Hill as a summer camp counselor at its Camp on the Hill program in July 2007. During his first month with the program, Woodhouse was allegedly found holding a minor female in his arms after two female lifeguards overheard the little girl yell, “Ow! Something is poking me in the butt.” As a result, Woodhouse was ordered to let go of the girl. Soon thereafter, he was allegedly seen leaving the pool with a full erection, causing one of the female lifeguards to tell a male lifeguard to follow Woodhouse into the bathroom, where Woodhouse was allegedly overheard masturbating in the stalls. As a result, Woodhouse was fired by Church on the Hill. However, the church neither reported the incident to the authorities or to the child’s parents. Woodhouse was then hired by Child Development Inc. in August 2010 to work as an assistant teacher’s aide at its Trace Child Development Center. Thereafter, Woodhouse allegedly molested over a dozen minor females. The parents of four minor females, including “Angelina”, age 7; “Mara”, age 6; “Mikayla”, age 5; and a fourth female, age 4, brought separate actions against Woodhouse, Child Development Inc., and Trace Child Development Center. They later amended their actions to include First Baptist Church of San Jose, which was doing business as Church on the Hill. The matters were ultimately joined and consolidated. Woodhouse, 27, was convicted after he confessed to abusing nine girls. He is now serving 30-years-to-life in prison. Prior to trial, CDI and First Baptist Church (Church on the Hill) agreed to a $400,000 settlement with the 4-year-old girl and her family. Of that total settlement, CDI contributed $300,000 and First Baptist Church contributed $100,000. CDI also confidentially settled with the families of Angelina, Mara and Mikayla, as well as the families of four other minor females, shortly after opening statements. Thus, the matter continued against First Baptist Church and Woodhouse only. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Woodhouse, a pedophile, was originally employed with First Baptist Church of San Jose in conjunction with three separate employments; the first from 2003 to 2004, the second from 2006 to 2007, and a volunteer position in 2009. Counsel contended that the July 2007 incident was reported to management, but First Baptist Church decided not to report the event to police or tell the parents of the minor female involved. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that First Baptist Church then terminated Woodhouse’s employment, but did not notify the parents of the children he was supervising. Thus, plaintiffs’ counsel argued that First Baptist Church was negligent for failing to report the incident to authorities, for failing to report the incident to the parents of the victim, and for failing to inform CDI in July 2010, when CDI asked for a reference. Counsel contended that as a result of First Baptist Church making a positive recommendation of Woodhouse to CDI, Woodhouse was hired by CDI at its daycare center, Trace Child Development Center, where he supervised dozens of minor females. In addition, counsel contended that while employed by CDI, Woodhouse inappropriately touched a number of girls when he was left alone with them, in violation of the Department of Social Services regulations. Plaintiffs’ counsel further contended that Angelina, Mara and Mikayla described events that included Woodhouse telling them, in separate instances, to sit on his lap before he placed his fingers down their pants and digitally penetrated them with his fingers. Counsel for First Baptist Church argued that, based on working and volunteering at the church for years when he was not attending college, Woodhouse already knew that the church had a long-established rule that children are not permitted to sit on an adult’s lap. Counsel contended that as a result, Woodhouse’s inappropriate conduct was immediately reported by the lifeguard to one of the directors of the summer camp who, in turn, immediately notified the assistant pastor. Woodhouse was then suspended that day, pending an investigation. Counsel contended that First Baptist Church decided to fire Woodhouse for insubordination based on Woodhouse’s defiance and failure to follow well-established church rules. However, counsel contended that the assistant pastor did not believe that the child had been sexually abused and, therefore, did not report the event to the police, nor did he notify the girl’s parents. First Baptist Church’s counsel contended that the assistant pastor viewed the incident as something that was definitely in violation of church rules and as inappropriate, but that he did not believe, based on the known facts and the girl’s behavior with Woodhouse, that she had been sexually abused. Thus, Counsel for First Baptist Church argued that the incident at the swimming pool did not constitute “child molestation,” therefore, there was no mandatory duty to report the incident to the police and that it was questionable as to whether CDI actually contacted the church for a reference. Counsel contended that the church’s director of “Children’s Ministries” knew Woodhouse when he volunteered on Sundays, but that she had no recollection of receiving a call from anyone soliciting a reference for Woodhouse. Counsel argued that this employee was not authorized to speak on behalf of the church and that the church had a policy prohibiting references on behalf of former employees. However, counsel argued that even if this had occurred, the employee had no knowledge of the pool incident that occurred three years earlier. Counsel for First Baptist Church further contended that, based on the testimony of the girls and the defense’s psychiatric and psychological interviews, examinations and testing, the extent of the inappropriate touching consisted of Woodhouse putting his hand down the back of the pants of the three girls once. In addition, the defense’s experts testified that the girls were more traumatized by the pressures placed upon them by the criminal and civil litigation than by what they experienced with Woodhouse., Each of the four minor plaintiffs claimed that they were molested and suffered some form of post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the abuse. The 4-year-old female child (who settled out before trial) reported headaches and a loss of positive attitude towards school, but received no treatment. The plaintiff’s child psychiatry expert, upon examination, diagnosed the child with post-traumatic stress disorder and recommended three years of therapy once a week, plus one year of once-weekly therapy in the future. The plaintiffs’ child psychiatry expert testified that with respect to the three minor children at trial — Angelina, Mara and Mikayla — they also suffered post-traumatic stress disorder. The expert also testified that the children would require a lifetime of psychological treatment and hospitalizations. In addition, the expert testified that Angelina, Mara and Mikayla would suffer some sort of future wage loss (i.e., the expert opined that all of the girls would be able to complete college, but that they would not be able to complete graduate school, resulting in a future wage loss). Counsel for First Baptist Church disputed the testimony of the plaintiffs’ child psychiatry expert regarding post-traumatic stress disorder, treatment and future wage loss. Instead, counsel argued that the children were more traumatized by the pressures placed upon them by the criminal and civil litigation than by what they experienced with Woodhouse. The defense’s experts opined that none of the girls would require future psychological/psychiatric treatment, and that what they experienced resulted in a transient adjustment disorder. After reviewing the girls’ educational and medical records, the girls’ and their parents’ deposition testimony, and conducting examinations and psychological testing, the defense’s experts opined that all three girls — Angelina, Mara and Mikayla — could accomplish anything they wanted to achieve in the future.