Beginning in January 2011, plaintiffs Monika Patterson, Silvia Salas, Janine Hill and Mindy Bonilla, all employees of Abundance Vineyards, were allegedly sexually harassed by co-owner Dino Mencarini. They also claimed that when they refused Dino Mencarini’s advances, he retaliated against them. Patterson, Salas, Hill and Bonilla, in a joint motion, sued Dino Mencarini; co-owner and Dino Mencarini’s brother, Ron Mencarini; Abundance Vineyards; Mencarini Vineyards Acquisitions, LLC; Mencarini Brothers; Mencarini Brothers, L.P.; Mencarini Brothers, LP; Mencarini Family Winery; Mencarini Vineyards Acquisitions; Mencarini Winery; Mencarini Winery, LLC; and Vineyard Acquisitions, LLC. Patterson, Salas, Hill and Bonilla alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted sexual harassment, failure to prevent harassment, assault and battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, all of which created a hostile work environment. They also claimed that the defendants retaliated against them, resulting in their wrongful termination or constructive discharge. Patterson was employed at the winery for one month in January 2011, Salas worked at the winery in mid-March 2011 until July 16, 2011, Bonilla was employed by the winery in November 2011, and Hill worked at the winery in 2012. They each accused Dino Mencarini, 70 at the time, of making unwanted advances and inappropriate comments toward them on multiple occasions during their employment. Specifically, they claimed that on their first day of work Dino Mencarini took them out on a golf cart to allegedly show them the vineyard, but that he acted inappropriately during the tour, subjecting them to sexual comments and unwanted touching. They also claimed that when they rejected his advances, they were fired by winery management or forced to quit. In addition, Patterson, Salas, Hill and Bonilla claimed that they eventually complained about Dino Mencarini’s behavior to Ron Mencarini, but that he failed to protect them or do anything about his brother’s behavior. Defense counsel disputed all of the plaintiffs’ allegations, and contended that Dino Mencarini did not sexually harass or retaliate against any of the plaintiffs., Patterson, Salas, Hill and Bonilla each claimed that they suffered emotional distress as a result of their treatment at the winery. Thus, they sought recovery of emotional-distress damages and future medical and/or psychological expenses in the six-figure range. Defense counsel disputed the plaintiffs’ alleged damages. Counsel noted that none of the plaintiffs had sought treatment since their employment and argued that the plaintiffs were unlikely to seek treatment in the future.