In February 2019, the plaintiff, a 13-year-old female, was booked into the San Francisco County’s locked juvenile facility by the San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department on alleged cell phone theft charges. The following day, a judge ordered the release of the teenager due to insufficient evidence in the case against her. However, probation officials, including Deputy Probation Officers Lyudmila Baranov and Moegagogo Tamasese, and the chief of the department, Allen Nance, did not release the teenager in accordance with the judge’s order. Instead, the officials submitted her case to a second judge, who agreed that the teenager should be detained and kept at the facility. Eleven days after the second judge’s order, the teenager appeared in front of the original judge, who asked why his earlier order was not followed. The teenager was then released. The teenager’s father, Rashad Abdullah, acting individually and as his daughter’s guardian, sued the City and County of San Francisco, Baranov, Nance and Tamasese.   Abdullah alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted violations of the teen’s civil rights. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the probation officers had ample opportunities to notify the court, as the second judge was not notified of the original order of the first judge, but failed to do so. Defense counsel disputed the allegations. Counsel contended that the first judge’s order was not received by the Juvenile Probation Department, or any probation officer, prior to the teen’s case being submitted a second time., The teenager claimed that she suffers from emotional distress as a result of being detained. She sought recovery for her emotional pain and suffering.