GREGORY J. OWEN, ESQ., CSB #102845 SUSAN A. OWEN, ESQ., CSB #143805 i] TAMIKO B. HERRON, ESQ., CSB #155923 SUPERIOR COURT CAUFORMA OWEN, PATTERSON OWEN, LLP coumv VERSIDE 23 822 West Valencia Boulevard, Suite 303 . Valencia, California 91355 MAY 0 2 2315 (661) 799-3899 - (661) B. Miller EM Attorneys for Plaintiff, E.S., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Glenda Ellis SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA E.S., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Glenda Ellis, VS. PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL KATHY CITY OF DESERT HOT JOHN DAVID and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Plaintiff, Re3pondents. COMPLAINT FOR: Intentional In?iction of Emotional Distress Negligence Negligence Negligence Sexual Battery Sexual Harassment 3" PLAIN DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages and Demand for Jury Trial a; 9102 a WW 28- COMES NOW Plaintiff, E.S., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Glenda Ellis for causes of action against Defendants, and each of them, and complains and alleges as follows: .. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. At all times relevant to this action, E.S. resided in the above-entitled county and judicial district. At the time the acts complained of herein occurred, he was a minor child, with a date of birth of December 28, 2002. Defendant PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: A. BS. is informed and belieVes and thereon alleges that Defendant, PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT is a business entity, form unknown, with its principal place of business located at 980 East TahquitzCanyon Way, Palm Springs, California 92262, which, at all times relevant to this action, regularly conducted business in the above entitled county and judicial district. B. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the Center for Learning and Development is a part of the PSUSD and is owned, - controlled and/or operated by PSUSD. C. CLD is located at 66755 Two Bunch Palms Trail, Desert Hot Springs, California 92240-5775. 3.. DefendantKATHY LITTLE: A. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that?Defendant, KATHY LITTLE is an individual and, at all times relevant to this action, was employed as the principal of CLD by PSUSD. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant to this action, LITTLE resided in the above. entitled county and judicial district. B. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant to this action, LITTLE was an agent and/or employee of PSUSD, and in doing the acts complained of herein, was acting in the course and scope of his Plaintiff? Complaint for Damages 2 and Demand for Jury Trial agency and/ or employment with PSUSD. C. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that LITTLE, in her position as principal, was the head supervisor of CLD. She was also the lead supervisor of Defendant, JOHN DAVID YODER Her duties included, but were not limited to, monitoring, supervising, and controlling the activities and behavior of teachers, including YODER. She was also responsible for monitoring, supervising and protecting the students of CLD, including, but not limited to, ES. Defendant, CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS: A. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant, CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS is a public entity, with its principal place of business located at 65-950 Pierson Boulevard, Desert Hot Springs, California 92240. B. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Frank Hodge Skate Park, located at 11-777 West Drive, Desert Hot Springs, California 92240 is and was, at all times relevant to this action, owned, operated, maintained, inspected, and under the control of CITY. C. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Guy J. Tedesco Park, located at 12?800 West Arroyo Drive, Desert Hot Springs, California 92240 is and was, at all times relevant to this action, owned, operated, maintained, inspected, and under the control of CITY. Defendant, YODER: A. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that YODER is an individual and, at all times relevant to this action, was employed as a classroom special education aide at CLD by PSUSD. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant to this action, YODER resided in the above entitled county and judicial district. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 3 . and Demand for Jury Trial informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant to this action, YODER was an agent and/or employee of PSUSD, and in doing the acts complained of herein, was acting in the course and scope of his agency and/or employment with PSUSD.1 6. DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, are sued herein under by such fictitious names. E.S. will seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint'by asserting the true names and capacities of the additional Defendants in the place and stead of said ?ctitious names when the true names have been ascertained. 7. ES. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each Defendant designated herein as DOES to ?50, inclusive, is responsible in some way and manner for the acts or occurrences herein alleged, Whether" such acts or occurrences Were committed intentionally, negligently, recklessly or otherwise, and that each DOE Defendant-is liable to ES. for damages suffered by ES. as alleged herein. 8. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that all times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, employee, designee, servant, partner, joint venturer, authorized representative and co?conspir?ator of each of the remaining Defendants, and was, in doing the things complained of herein, acting within the purpose and scope of such agency, employment and other such relationship and activity. In addition, at relevant times, Defendants and each of them acted in concert with the remaining Defendants, and with the knowledge, approval, direction and rati?cation of, participation with, acquiescence to, and authority of each of them to do the acts, omissiOns and injuries herein alleged. 9. ES. is informed and believes and thereon. alleges that some or all of the acts complained of occurred at CLD, FHSP and GTP. 10. The name used by? BS. in this Complaint is not the actual name of BS, but is a ?ctitious name utilized to protect the privacy of BS, a victim of childhood sexual harasSment and abuse. PSUSD, CITY, LITTLE and YODER are sometimes collectively referred to herein as ?Defendants.? Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 4 and Demand for Jury Trial FACTS PERTINENT TO ALL ALLEGATIONS 11. ES. attended CLD from January 2013 through July 2013, at which time, CLD was closed. The reasons for such closure are unknown to ES, 12. Due to diagnosis of mental retardation with pervasive developmental delay and autistic features, he was required to attend special education classes and was enrolled in a special education class at CLD. E.S. currently is the developmental age of six (6) years old. These issues were known to PSUSD, CLD, LITTLE, YODER, and/or DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, prior to ES. attending CLD as mother, discussed same with LITTLE, YODER and numerous other CLD employees/ agents. 13. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were assigned by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, to be the aide for classroom. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, befriended ES. and became more and more involved with multiple facets of life. 14. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, knew that B.L. worked full time in order to support her family, and offered to drive ES. to and from CLD. 15. YODER and/0r DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, paid special one-on-one attention to ES. at CLD and spent a lot of time with E.S. alone. When became aware of this, she voiced her concerns to PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that YODER and/or DOES 1 to inclusive, was/were reprimanded by PSUSD, LITTLE, and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, for spending too much time with E.S.. Despite same, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to ?25, inclusive, allowed YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to have continued direct and unfettered contact with ES. 16. On many occasions when YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, said they were going to take E.S. home or help E.S. do homework, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, instead would drive ES. to FHSP and/or GTP instead. 17. On multiple occasions beginning in January 2013 and continuing thereafter, through July 2013, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, committed various acts of sexual molestation upon E.S. at 1,9, inappropriately touching ES. and private parts of body, and YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, forced ES. to touch the private parts of YODER Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 5 and Demand for Jury Trial COOK-100143 and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. These acts were numerous and occurred on the CLD premises while purportedly under the supervision of PSUSD, LITTLE, and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. 18. Additionally, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, took ES. to HSP and GTP, locations which at all relevant times were under the supervision and control of CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive, and used E.S. as bait to entice other minors to travel with them to the residences and/or other locations of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in order to commit multiple acts of sexual molestation, including rape and sodomy, on such minors. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, told ES. and these other children that he/they was/were Hollywood producer(s) and that the children would be famous in order to induce the children to go with them. 19. Further, on multiple occasions beginning in January 2013 and thereafter, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, cormnitted various acts of sexual molestation upon E.S. at FHSP and E, inappropriately touching ES. and private parts of body, and YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, required that ES. to do the same. These acts were numerous and occurred at FHSP and GTP while purportedly under the supervision of CITY and/or DOES 2.6 to 50, inclusive. 20. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, threatened to hurt ES. and family if E.S. told anyone about what was occurring at CLD, FHSP and GTP. Therefore, E.S. did not inform anyone of the acts being perpetrated upon him and other minors until after arrest on January 29, 2015. 21. YODER was charged with ?ve felony counts against minors, including violations of Penal Code ?288a (oral copulation with minors under 14 years of age), Penal Code ?23 6.1 (attempts to induce minors to engage in a commercial sex act), Penal Code ?182 (conspiracy with another defendant to commit the crime of using minors to perform sex acts, in violation of P_en_al Co_de ?311.403), Penal Code ?288(a) (lewd and lascivious acts with minors under 14 years of age) and Penal Code ?32 (harboring another individual with knowledge that this individual committed child pomography). Plaintiff Complaint for Damages 6 and Demand for Jury Trial ?Jam-J22. YODER was convicted of four counts of lewd acts with a child under 14, two counts of human traf?cking, two counts of procuring a child for sex and one count each of conspiracy to commit child pornography and harboring a fugitive. YODER was sentenced to more than 20 years in prison. E.S. testi?ed at trial. 23. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that there had been reports of sexual abuse and/or misconduct with children that involved or implicated YODER, including, but not limited to, other PSUSD teachers, prior to the time that YODER was hired by PSUSD. The reports were ignored, and no action was taken against YODER by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, and YODER was hired and retained in his position at CLD by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, which in turn allowed him to continue to sexually abuse CLD students, including ES. 24. Absent any action by PSUSD or CLD administration, to supervise or restrain YODER, he continued his pattern of rampant sexual abuse of minor students, including, but not limited to, E.S., robbing them of their trust, peace of mind, innocence and childhood. Serial sexual abuse of the nature, duration and extent of that engaged in by YODER could not have been accomplished without the aid and assistance of many other PSUSD staff and/or administration of?cials and without the PSUSD itself turning a blind to what was occurring. 25. Defendants, and each of them, knew that E.S. was a minor at the times of the incidents and while E.S. attended CLD. 26. The inappropriate and/or sexual conduct of YODER occurred during the entire time that E.S. was a student in classroom. 27. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew that E.S. was a student of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, after the allegations of inappropriate touching were provided to PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, prior to ES. being a student in their classroom. Plaintiffs Complaint for Damages 7 and Demand for Jury Trial ?28 28. PSUSD, LITTLE and/0r DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, allowed YODER, and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, have direct, unsupervised and unfettered access to ES. during all times of the day, including before school, during school and during after school hours, despite the knowledge of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, of multiple allegations against YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, of their unlawful, inappropriate sexual behavior with minor students. 29. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, are responsible for creating the condition that resulted in the injuries to ES, as they failed to take any actions after notice of the misconduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were reported to them prior to ES. being a student at CLD. 30. The risk of a sexual assault was created by PSUSD, LITTLE and DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, numerous failures to conduct adequate investigation(s) into the allegations regarding the conduct of YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, after notice and being informed of same prior to ES. being a student at CLD. 31. The incidents of abuse outlined herein took place while E.S. was under the control of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in their capacities and positions as teachers, teacher?s assistants, aides, counselors and mentors at CLD, and while speci?cally acting on behalf of PSUSD and/or its agents and/or employees. 32. YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, were at all times relevant to this Complaint, teachers, advisers and mentors at CLD, an institution wholly operated by PSUSD and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. 33. While YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, sexually harassed, molested and abused E.S., PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, were aware that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, took an unusual interest, and spent an inordinate amount of time with ES. as set forth herein. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 8 and Demand for Jury Trial 34. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to put any procedures in place to ensure that such conduct as alleged herein did not occur and failed to ensure the abuse did not continue even after they notice and had been informed on numerous occasions about the behavior of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 35. Further, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, rati?ed the conduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, by failing to take any actions after being informed of serious allegations regarding the conduct of YODER in relation to multiple minor students at CLD. By such actions/inactions by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, the acts of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were adopted by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, and had the same force and/or effect as if originally authorized by them. 36. At the time of the incidences of sexual abuse and molestation of BS. by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were at CLD, employed by PSUSD, were on active duty at CLD for the speci?c purpose of teaching, mentoring, counseling and/0r aiding minor students, including E.S. Accordingly, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were acting in the course and scope of their employment with PSUSD at the times of the incidents. 37. By hiring YODER and/or DOES 1' to 5, inclusive, to serve as schoolteachers, counselors, mentors and/or aides to minor students, PSUSD held YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive out to the public, ES. and his family, to be of high ethical and moral repute, and to be in good standing with PSUSD, the County of Los Angeles, the State of CalifOrnia, and the public. PSUSD represented to the public, ES. and her family, that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were highly duali?ed school teachers, counselors, mentors and/or aides, who would assist with working through academic issues he faced. Inherent in these representations was the understanding that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were selected to educate, lead, guide and mentor E.S. ES. and his family reasonably assumed that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were put into a position to teach and advise minor students at CLD, including E.S., regarding academics and general issues. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages. 9 and Demand for Jury Trial all times material hereto, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were employed by PSUSD as teachers, advisors, mentors and/or counselors. In such capacities, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were under the direct supervision, employ, agency and control of PSUSD and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. The duties and responsibilities of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, pursuant to his/their employment with PSUSD at CLD, provided for the supervision, advisory, educational and emotional needs and well-being of students at CLD, including, but not limited to, ES. 39. Through his position with PSUSD at CLD, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were put into direct contact with E.S., a student at CLD. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were assigned, by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, to teach, coach, advise and mentor E.S. It is under these circumstances that E.S. came to be under the direction and control of YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, who used their position of authority and trust over ES. to sexually harass, molest and abuse ES. 40. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, sexually harassed, molested and abused E.S., who was a minor at all times of the harassment, molestation and abuse. Such conduct was done for the sexual grati?cation of YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, and was performed on E.S., a minor, without his free consent, as E.S. was a minor at all relevant times and thus was unable to give valid and legal consent to such acts. These actions upon ES. constituted conduct in violation of Penal Code ?647.6, and others. 41. As a student at CLD, E.S. was under the direct supervision, care and control of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, thus creating a special relationship and con?dential relationship with PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. Additionally, as a minor child under the care, custody and control of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 I inclusive, they stood in loco parentis with respect to ES. while he was attending CLD and school related functions which took place both on the CLD campus, and off, such as ?eld trips. As the responsible parties and employers controlling YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, were in a special relationship with ES, and owed special duties to ES. Plaintiffs Complaint for Damages 10 and Demand for Jury Trial .pmN 42. Before E.S. was sexually assaulted by YODER and/or DOES I to 5, inclusive, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, had engaged in unlaw?? sexually?related conduct with minors in the past, and/or was continuing to engage in such conduct. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had a duty to disclose these facts to ES, his parents, and others, but suppressed, concealed, or failed to disclose this information. The duty to disclose this information arose by the special, trusting, con?dential and in loco parentis relationship between PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, and ES. 43. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to take reasonable steps and implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts? of unlawful sexual conduct by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, including preventing abuse of BS. by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, avoiding placement of YODER and/or DOES 1m 5, inclusive, in a ?mction or environment in which contact with children is an inherent part of that function or environment. Instead, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, ignored and concealed the sexual abuse of BS. and others by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, that had already occurred. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to properly supervise YODER, which led to many students, including E.S., being repeatedly sexually abused by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 44. Prior to and during the sexual harassment, molestation and abuse of BS, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, had violated their roles as teachers, advisors and faculty members, and used their position of authority and trust, acting on behalf of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, to gain access to children, including E.S., on and off the CLD campus, in which they caused ES. to touch them, to allow them to touch BS. in a sexual manner, and engaged in sexual conduct and abuse, including harassment and molestation, which such children, including ES. 45. With knowledge that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, had previously engaged in dangerous and inappropriate conduct with children, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, conspired .to and did knowingly fail to take steps, and failed to implement Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 1 1 and Demand for Jury Trial reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, including preventing or avoiding placement of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in a function or environment in which contact with children is an inherent aspect of that function or environment. 46. ES. ?irther alleges that PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to report and did hide, conceal and destroy, from students, parents, teachers, law enforcement authorities, civil authorities and others, the true facts and relevant information necessary to bring YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to justice for the seXual misconduct YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, committed with minors, as well as protect minors under their care, including ES. 47. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, intentionally destroyed evidence of the crimes committed by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. Such destruction, included, but was not limited to, the destruction of SCAR reports and CLD school reports related speci?cally to the inappropriate conduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 48. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, also implemented various measures designed to, or which effectively, made the conduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, harder to detect, including, but not limited to: a. Permitting YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to remain in a position of authority and trust a?er PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were molesters of children. b. Placing YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in a separate and secluded environment, including placing them in charge of young children, after school programs, advising programs and youth programs where they purported to supervise the children, which allowed them to sexually and physically interact with and abuse the children, including E.S. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 12 and Demand for Jury Trial 49. Allowing YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to come in contact with minors, including E.S., without any supervision. Failing to inform, or concealing from E.S., his parents and/or law enforcement of?cials, the fact that ES. and other student were or may have been sexually abused after PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, may have sexually abused ES. and others, thereby enabling ES. to continue to be endangered and abused, and creating the circumstance where ES. and others were less likely to receive medical/mental health care and treatment, thus exacerbating the harm to ES. Holding out YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, to ES. and his parents, students and to the school community as being in good standing and trustworthy. Failing to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, with students who were minor children, including E.S. Failing to. put in place a system or procedure to supervise or monitor employees, volunteers, representatives or agents to insure that they did not molest or abuse minors who were in the care of Defendants, and each of them. Defendants, and each of them, demanded and required that E.S. respect YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, in their position as teachers, advi'sors, aides and mentors at CLD. 50. During the period of abuse of BS. at the hands of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had the authority and/or ability to obstruct or stop YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, and his acts of sexual assaults and harassment of E.S., but failed to do so, thereby allowing the abuse to occur and continue unabated. This failure was a part of the plan of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, and arrangement to conceal wrongful acts, to avoid and inhibit detection, to block public disclosure, to Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 13 and Demand for Jury Trial 1 avoid scandal, to avoid the disclosure of their tolerance of child sexual molestation and abuse, to 2 preserve a false appearance of propriety, and to avoid investigation and action by public authority 3 including law enforcement. Such actions were motivated by a desire to protect the reputation of 4 PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, and to protect the monetary support of PSUSD, 5 While fostering an environment where such abuse could continue to occur. 6 51. As is set forth herein, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to 7 uphold numerous statutory duties imposed upon them by state and federal law, and by written 8 policies and procedures applicable to Defendants, and each of them, including, but not limited to 9 the following: 10 a. A duty of care to provide an environment in which E.S. would be safe ?'om 11 unwanted physical contact and unwanted sexual conduct. The California 12 Constitution, Art. I, ?28, subd. provides that students have inalienable 13 right to attend safe, secure and peaceful campuses. 14 b. A duty to provide policies and procedures for the proper safety of students- 15 and enrollees during all school hours, while at school sponsored activities 16 and while students and enrollees are using education services, to ensure that 17 when minor children use their facilities, their facilities are safe from adults, 18 minors and predators, even if those predators are hired by PSUSD, LITTLE 19 and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive. 20 c. A duty to provide policies and procedures for the use of classrooms, during 21 all school hours, before school hours and after school hours, to ensure that 22 when minor children are in the classrooms, no matter what time of day, they 23 are free to do so. 24 d. A mandatory duty pursuant to California Penal Code 1 166 and 1 1 165.7 25 to report the activities of YODER, and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. They had 26 a duty to make the ?rst report by telephone, then to follow-up by written 27 noti?cation within 3 6 hours of receiving the information. 28 Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages l4 and Demand for Jury Trial 1 e. A duty to enforce their rules and regulations necessary for the protection of 2 their students and a duty to hold their employees to a strict account for their 3 conduct at CLD, on the playgrounds, in the classrooms, on the school yard, 4 during recess, breaks and lunches, pursuant to Education Code ?44807. 5 f. A duty to use reasonable care to protect students from known or foreseeable 6 dangers. (Government Code ??820, 815.2). 7 g. A duty to enact policies and procedures that are not in contravention of the 8 Federal Civil Rights Act, ?1983, and the 14th Amendment of the United 9 States Constitution. 10 h. A duty to immediately investigate and research any claims made against 11 YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to determine their truth, and once 12 determined, to suspend and then terminate YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, 1 3 inclusive. 14 i. A duty to implement reasonable safeguards, to avoid acts of unlawful sexual 15 conduct in the future by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, including, 16 but not limited to, preventing or avoiding placement of YODER and/or 17 DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in a function or environment in which contact with 18 children is an inherent part of that function or environment. 19 j. A duty to have faculty, staff, employees, agents and/or co-workers check the 20 school grounds and classrooms during intermittent times throughout the 21 day, including break time, snack time, lunch time, recess, before school and 22 after school, to ensure that individuals on the CLD campus, including, but 23 not limited to, employees, faculty, staff, volunteers and students, were not 24 engaging in inappropriate behavior in such locations. 25 k. A duty to manage their faculty, staff, employees and/or agents, including, 26 . but not limited to, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in such a way 27 that students and enrollees are protected, employees anticipate foreseeable 28 issues, and employees take steps to ensure that students and enrollees are 15 52. protected. This duty applies not only to dangerous conditions, but to general operations as well. A duty to refrain from violating rights to protection from bodily restraint. or harm, from personal insult, defamation and injury to his personal relations. (Civil Code A duty to abstain from injuring the person or property of E.S., or infringing upon any of his rights. (Civil Code ?l708.) A duty to establish various school safety and violence prevention programs. (Education Code ??32228, 32228.5, 35294.10?3 5294.15.) A mandatory duty to supervise students in their care, at all times, and to enforce the rules and regulations necessary for the protection of students. (Education Code ?44807; Government Code ?81 5 .6.) A mandatory duty imposed to take immediate steps to intervene where they witnessed an act of ?discrimination, harassment, intimidation, or bullying.? (Education Code A mandatory duty to prepare a ?timeline to investigate and resolve complaints of discrimination, harassment, intimidation, or bullying that shall be followed by all schools under the jurisdiction of the school distric (Education Code A mandatory duty, pursuant to Education Code ?32261, to provide ES. and all CLD students, with the ?inalienable righ ?to attend classes at CLD that were safe, secure and peaceful. PSUSD, as a public entity, may be liable in tort under Government Code ?81 5 .6 where it knows or should know that its failure to exercise its duties to reasonably supervise employees will result in coercing others to violate state laws, and where such violation proximately results in an injury of the kind that the law was designed to prevent. (Ramos v. Coun? of Madera (1971) 4 Cal.3d 685, 695?696.) Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 16 and Demand for Jury Trial 53. Government Code ?815.2(a) provides that: public entity is liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment if the act or omission would, apart frOm this section, have given rise to a cause of action against that employee or his personal representative.? 54. Government Code ?820(a) provides that: ?Except as otherwise provided by statute (including Section 820.2), a public employee is liable for injury caused by his act or omission to the same extent as a private person.? 55,. Compulsory education laws create a special relationship between students and PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, and students have a constitutional guarantee to a safe, secure and peaceful school environment. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to acknowledge unsafe conditions at CLD, and therefore failed to guarantee safe surroundings in an environment in which E.S. was not free to leave, speci?cally including, but not limited to, allowing YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to take children for purposes of sexual activity and allowing YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to operate isolated environments, incapable of being monitored from the outside. I 5 6. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had and have a duty to protect students, including E.S. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, were required to, and failed, to provide adequate campus and off?site school event supervision, and failed to be properly vigilant in seeing that supervision was suf?cient to ensure the safety of BS. and others. 5 7. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, lodged with YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, the color of authority, by which YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were able to in?uence, direct and abuse ES. and others, and to act illegally, unreasonably and without respect for the person and safety of BS. 58. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had a duty to and failed to adequately train and supervise all counselors, advisors, teachers, coaches, mentors, aides and staff to create a positive, safe, spiritual and educational environment, speci?cally including training to perceive, report and stop inappropriate conduct by other members of the staff, speci?cally including YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, with children. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 17 and Demand for Jury Trial 59. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had a duty and failed to enact and enforce rules and regulations prescribed for schools, and execute reasonable control over students necessary to protect the health and safety of the student and maintain proper and appropriate conditions conducive to learning. 60. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, were required and failed to exercise careful supervision of the moral conditions of their school, and provide supervision before and after school. This duty extended beyond the classroom. 61. CITY and/or DOES 26. to 50, inclusive, as landowners of FHSP and GTP had a duty to be sensitive to potentially dangerous conditions at FHSP and GTP, which were likely to attract both children and predators, such as YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive. 62. CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive, were mandatory reporters, and they were therefore required, by law, to report the acts of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, once they learned any fact or allegation as to same. BS. is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the acts complained of by ES. were not reported as required by law. 63. The acts of abuse began in January 2013, when ES. was only ten (10) years old. Given youth, medical condition, ignorance and inexperience, claim did not accrue until January 29, 2015, when YODER was arrested. 64. Under Government Code ?905(m), actions against public entities for childhood sexual abuse are exempt from the claims presentation requirements for conduct occurring after January 1, 2009. Accordingly, ES. was not required to ?le a government claim. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Against YODER, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 1 to 25, inclusive) 65. ES. repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by this reference all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint with the same force and effect as if set forth in full. 66. At the time of the incidents, YODER, LITTLE and/or DOES to 25, inclusive, were acting in the course and scope of their employment with PSUSD. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 1 8 and Demand for Jury Trial 67. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know of - the heinous acts being perpetrated by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, upon E.S., as they had previously been given notice of such acts. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, chose to turn a blind?eye to the acts of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, thereby allowing ES. to be continually sexually abused and molested while at CLD, under the care, custody and control of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. 68. In committing the acts as hereinabove alleged, Defendants, and each of them, acted in an extreme and outrageous fashion. 69. A reasonable person would not expect or tolerate PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, putting YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in positiOns of authority at CLD. This enabled YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to have access to minor students, including E.S., so that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, could commit wrongful acts with E.S., and other'minor students,- including the conduct described herein. 70. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had prior knowledge of the misconduct of YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, and the sexual abuse and/or inappropriate sexual conduct by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. Yet, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed. to take any actions against YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, knew or should have known, of the misconduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, but nonetheless allowed YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to continue working as an aide with unfettered access to students, including E.S. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, rati?ed the conduct of YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, by permitting YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to continue teaching after PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew of the misconduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 71. As a proximate result of said extreme and outrageous conduct, E.S. has suffered and continues to suffer pain, discomfort, anxiety, extreme emotional distress, embarrassment, humiliation, depression, shock, and injury as well as losses in medical expenses, future medical expenses, loss of future eamings and/or earning capacity, if any, and other damages, all in an Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 19 and Demand for Jury Trial . ?amount according to proof and in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court. If the Court requires, E.S.. shall seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint with the exact amount of his damages when the same has been ascertained. 72. The aforementioned conduct of YODER, LITTLE and/or DOES .1 to 25, inclusive, was wil?il, oppressive and/or was done with reckless disregard for the rights of BS. and was intended to oppress and cause injury to ES, and in conscious disregard of rights so as to constitute malice and oppression under Civil Code ?3294. Said conduct was despicable condUct that subjected ES. to a cruel and unjust hardship so as to justify an award of exemplary and . punitive damages, against YODER, LITTLE and/or DOES 1 to ?25, inclusive. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION For Negligence (Against PSU SD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive) 73. ES. repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive, ofthis' Complaint with the same force and effect as if set forth in full. 74., In doing the acts described herein, PSUSD, LITTLE and/orDOES 6 to 25, inclusiVe, negligently, carelessly and acted in such a manner that severe injuries were caused to ES. 75. At all times mentioned herein, E.S. had the expectation that he would be safe and secure at CLD, ?ee from unwanted physical contact and sexual molestation on the premises of CLD, and that he would'be free to enjoy an education as required, while a student at CLD. 76. 1 Prior to and after the ?rst incident of sexual harassment, molestation and abuse of BS. by YODER and/or DOES. 1 to 5, inclusive, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 57, inclusive, Were capable of such conduct. 77.. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had special duties to. protect the ES. and other students within and PSUSD, when such students were entrusted to their care by their parents. care, welfare and physical custody were entrusted to PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, voluntarily . Plainti??s Complaint for Damages 20 and Demand for Jury Trial .pmN 60(3le accepted the entrusted care of BS. As such, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, owed E.S., a minor child, a special duty of care, in addition to a duty of ordinary care, and owed E.S. the higher duty of care that adults dealing with children owe to protect them from harm. The duty to protect and warn arose from the special, trusting and con?dential relationship between Defendants and ES. ES. and his parents, instilled great trust, faith and con?dence in PSUSD, LITTLE and/0r DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. 78. The injuries suffered by ES. as set forth herein are precisely the type of injuries which the aforementioned statutes and regulations are designed to prevent; jg, to protect and to prevent injuries to minors and to students. 79. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know in the exercise of reasonable diligence that an undue risk to minors, including E.S., existed because PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, did not comply with California?s Education Q5313 school safety and protection requirements. 80. By failing to adhere to the Education Code?s school safety and protection requirements, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, created the risk and danger contemplated by the Education Code and as a result, unreasonably and wrongfully exposed ES. and other minors to sexual molestation and abuse. 81. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, breached their duties of care to the minor E.S. by allowing YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to come into contact with the minor ES. and other students, without supervision; by failing to adequately hire, supervise and retain YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, who they permitted and enabled to have unfettered access to by failing to investigate and otherwise con?rm or deny such facts about YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive; by failing to tell or concealing from ES, his parents, his guardians and law enforcement of?cials, that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were or may have been sexually harassing molesting and abusing minors; by failing to tell or concealing that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, had been sexually harassing, molesting and/or abusing minors after they knew, or had reason to know of such conduct by YODER and/0r DOES 1 t0 5, inclusive; and by holding out YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to ES. and his parents as trustworthy and Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 21 and Demand for Jury Trial \o?ooqoxm-meH 28 l?i being in good standing. 82. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, breached their duties to ES, by inter alia, failing to investigate or otherWise con?rm 0r deny such facts, failing to reveal such facts to E.S., his parents, the commumty of the school, students, minors, and law enforcement agencies, by placing and continuing to place YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in positions of trust and authority within CLD and the PSUSD, and holding out, and continuing to hold out, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to E.S., his parents, the public, the community of the school, students, minors and law enforcement agencies, as being in good standing and trustworthy. 83. As an educational institution for minors, where all of the students are entrusted to the teachers, advisors, mentors, coaches, faculty members and administrators, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, expressly and implicitly represented that YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were not a sexual threat to children and others who would fall under YODER and/or. DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in?uence, control, direction and guidance. 84. At no time during the periods of time: alleged, did PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, have in place a system or procedure to reasonably investigate, supervise and . ,monitor aides, including YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to prevent =pre?sexua1 grooming and sexual harassment, molestation and abuse of children, nor did they implement a system or procedure to oversee or monitor conduct towards minors, students and others in their care. 85. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, oWed E.S. .a duty to take reasonable protective measures to protect ES. and other minor students from the risk of childhood sexual harassment, molestation and abuse by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, by properly warning, training or educating ES. and other students about how to avoid such risk. 86. Under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, Defendants, and each of them, were child care custodians and were under a statutory duty to report known orlsuspected incidents of sexual molestation and. abuse of minors to a child protective agency, pursuant to California - . Penal Code ?11166, and/or not to impede the ?ling of such reports. 87. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, knew or had reason to know that their agents, employees, advisors and mentors, YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, of CLD Plaintiff Complaint fOr Damages 22 - and Demand for July Trial had sexually abused, molested, abused or caused touching, battery, harm, and other injuries to minors, including E.S., giving rise to a duty to report such conduct under California Penal Code ?11166. 88. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew, or had reason to know, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, that an undue risk to minors, including E.S., existed because they did not comply with California?s mandatory reporting requirements. 89. By failing to report the continuing molestations and abuse, which PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew of or had reason to know of, and by ignoring the ful?llment of the mandated compliance with the reporting requirements provided under California Penal Code ?11166, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, created the risk of danger contemplated by the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, and as a result, unreasonably and wrongfully exposed ES. and other minors to sexual molestation and abuse. 90. Under the Education Code ??32228, 32228.5, 35294.10-35294.15, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had a duty to establish various school safety programs designed to protect minor students, such as E.S., from the conduct of YODER and/or DOES Ito 5, inclusive. i 91. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know that their agents, employees, advisors and mentors, including YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, were engaging in sexually conduct with minor students, including ES. 92. The breach of the above mentioned duties by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, was the direct and proximate cause of severe emotional injuries. Had PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, monitored the classrooms, monitored the CLD campus, implemented policies and procedures and followed policies and procedures, E.S. may not have been injured and/ or injured to the severe extent he was injured by the inactions of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. 93. As a direct and proximate result of such negligent and wrongful conduct by PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, E.S. has suffered and continues to suffer pain, discomfort, anxiety, extreme emotional distress, embarrassment, humiliation, depression, shock Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 23 and Demand for Jury Trial 0'30le 2?8 and injury as well as losses in medical expenses, future medical expenses, loss of ?lture earnings and/or earning capacity, if any, and other damages, all in an amount according to proof and in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court. If the Court requires, E.S. shall seek leave of Court to amend this complaint with the exact amount of his damages when the same has been ascertained. . THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION For Negligence (Against CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive) 94. ES. repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive, of this Complaint with the same force and effect as if set forth in ?ll. 95. In. doing the acts described herein, CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive, negligently, carelessly and unlawfully acted in such a manner that severe injuries were caused to ES. 96. At all. times mentioned herein, E.S. had the expectation that he would be safe and secure at FHSP and/or GTP, free from unwanted physical contact and sexual molestation on the premises of FHSP and/or GTP, and that he would be free to enjoy the premises at FHSP and GTP as a paying or invited patron of GHSP and GTP. . 97. CITY and/or DOES 26 to. 50, inclusive, as landowners of FHSP and GTP had a duty to be sensitive to potentially dangerous conditions at FHSP and GTP, which were likely to . attract both? children and predators, such as YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 98. CITY and its employees, and/or DOES 26 to 50-, inclusive, had a duty to, inter a_lia, any of the following: I I .. A. Supervise the common area of FHSP and GTP, including, but not limited to, the parks, grounds, structures and/or bathrooms. B. Conduct intermittent checks of FHSP and GTP, including the bathrooms. Ensure the safety of the invited guests at FHSP and GTP. Contact the proper authorities, as mandated reporters, as to the conduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 24 and Demand for Jury Trial 1 - E. Post warnings at FHSP and GTP regarding the dangers inherent to the 2 attractions at such locations, including those conditions which are likely to 3 attract minors and predators. - 4 F. Take af?rmiative actions to protect invited guests from dangers inherent to 5 . the attractions at FHSP and GTP, including those conditions which are 6 likely to attract minors and predators. 7 G. Pass and. adopt ordinances which are necessary for the protection of users of 8 FHSP and GTP. 9 H. To uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the 10 state and?to carry out impartially the laWs of the nation, the state, and the 11 City and thus to foster respect for all govemment'._ Public of?cials and 12 employees are bound to observein their of?cial acts the highest standards of 13 performance and to discharge faith?illy'the duties of their of?ce, regardless 14 of personal consideration. Recognizing that the public interest must be their 15 primary concern, their conduct in both their of?cial and private affairs 16 should be above reproach. (Desert Hot Springs Municipal Code 2.20.020). 17 I. ?4 To inspect all property under its control to ascertain whether the provisions 18 of the municipal code and/or applicable statutes, rules, codes and 19 regulations are being obeyed and to make any examinations and surveys as 20 . may be necessary in the performance of his or her code enforcement duties. . 21 Inspections may include and/or inVOlve the taking. of photo graphs, samples, . I 22 or?other physical evidence and conferring with persons present. (Desert Hot 23 Springs Municipal Code 4.12.010). 24 J. Abate any and all public nuisances (as de?ned by Desert Hot Springs 25 Municipal Code 4.16.010.) (Desert Hot Springs Municipal Code 4.16.020). 26 27 28 Plaintiff? Complaint for Damages 25 and Demand for Jury Trial 99. CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive, breached the above-stated duties, and said breach was the direct and proximate cause of injuries. Had CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive, not breached said duties as outlined herein, E.S. may not have been injured and/or injured to the severe extent he was injured by the inactions of CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive. 100. As a direct and proximate result of such negligent and wrongful conduct by CITY and/or DOES 26 to 50, inclusive, E.S. has suffered and continues to suffer pain, discomfort, anxiety, extreme emotional distress, embarrassment, humiliation, depression, shock and injury as well as losses in medical expenses, future medical expenses, loss of future earnings and/or earning capacity, if any, and other damages, all in an amount according to proof and in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court. If the Court requires, E.S. shall seek leave of Court to amend this complaint with the exact amount of his damages when the same has been ascertained. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION For Negligence (Against Defendants, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive) 101. ES. repeats, re?alleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive, of this Complaint with the same force and effect as if set forth in full. 102. In doing the acts described herein, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, negligently, carelessly and unlawfully acted in such a manner that severe injuries were caused to ES. 103. At all times mentioned herein, E.S. had the expectation that he would be safe and secure at CLD, HSP, and GTP, and that he would not be sexually assaulted and molested. 104. YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, owed a duty of care to ES, a minor child, to refrain from committing any acts that would harm E.S. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, had a duty to not sexually assault and molest ES. 105. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, owed a duty of care to ES, a minor child, to allow him to be free of inappropriate touching. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 26 and Demand for Jury Trial 106. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, owed a duty of care to ES. to maintain and enforce those rules and regulations necessary for the protection of E.S. pursuant to Education Code ?44807. 107. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, breached such duties of care in that E.S. was sexually molested at CLD. . 108. YODER and/or DOES 1 t0 5, inclusive, breached such duties when YODER inappropriately touched ES. 109. Government Code ?820(a) provides that: ?Except as otherwise provided by statute (including Section 820.2), a public employee is liable for injury caused by his act or omission to the same extent as a private person.? 110. In doing the acts complained of herein, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, violated certain provisions of the California Penal Code, which prohibit, 111E Lia, sexual acts with a minor, including, but not limited to: Penal Code ?288(a). 111. The injuries suffered by ES. as set forth herein are precisely the type of injuries which the aforementioned statutes and regulations are designed to prevent; ii, to protect and to prevent injuries to minors. 112. The breach of the above mentioned duties by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, was the direct and proximate cause of severe emotional injuries. 113. As a direct and proximate result of such negligent and wrongful condUct by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, E.S. has suffered and continues to suffer pain, discomfort, anxiety, extreme emotional distress, embarrassment, humiliation, depression, shock and injury as well as losses in medical expenses, future medical expenses, loss of future earnings and/or earning capacity, if any, and other damages, all in an amount according to proof and in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court. If the Court requires, E.S. shall seek leave of Court to amend this complaint with the exact amount of his damages when the same has been ascertained. Plainti??s Complaint for Damages 27 and Demand for Jury Trial 2.8 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION For Sexual Battery (Against YODER and/0r DOES 1 to 5, inclusive) 114. ES repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive, of this Complaint with the same force and effect as if set forth in full. 115. In doing the wrongful acts described hereinab?ove, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, intentionally engaged in sexual acts with 13.8., over an extended period of time, and on multiple occasions, which resulted in sexually offensive contacts with person. 116. YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, did so with the intent to cause a harmful and/ or offensive contact with an intimate part of ES. 117. ES. did not and could not consent to the sexual contact as, he was a minor at the time. . 118. As a direct and proximate result of said sexual battery, E.S. has suffered and continues to suffer pain, discomfort, anxiety, extreme emotional distress, embarrassment, humiliation, depression, shock and injury to his persOnal dignity, as well as substantial losses in medical expenses, loss of future earnings and/or earning capacity, if any, and other damages, all in an amount according to proof and in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court. If the Court requires, E.S. shall seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint with the exact amount of his damages when the same has been ascertained. 119. The aforementioned conduct of YODER and/or DOES to 5, inclusive, was wilful, oppressive and/or was done with reckless disregard for the rights of BS. and was intended to oppress and cause injury to ES, and in conscious disregard of rights so as to constitute malice and oppression under Civil Code ?3294. Said conduct was despicable conduct that subjected ES. to a cruel and unjust hardship so as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages, against YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. Plaintiffs Complaint for Damages 28 and Demand for Jury Trial ?aw-boom SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION For Sexual Harassment: Civil Code ?51.9 (Against PSUSD, LITTLE, YODER andlor DOES 1 to 25, inclusive) 120. ES. repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 64, of this Complaint with the same force and effect as if set forth in full. 121. During time as a student at CLD, YODER and/0r DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, intentionally, recklessly and wantonly made sexual advances, solicitations, requests, demands for sexual compliance of a hostile nature based on gender that were unwelcome, pervasive and severe. YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, intentionally, recklessly and wantonly did acts which resulted in a harmful and offensive contact with intimate parts of person, including, but not limited to, YODER and/or DOES 1 to inclusive, using the authority and trust inherent in their position as school teachers, to exploit ES. and other minor students, physically, emotionally and These acts were done for the sexual grati?cation 'of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, all while they were acting within the course and scope of their employment and/or agency with PSUSD. 122. The incidents of abuse took place as stated herein, took place while E.S. was under the care of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, in their capacities and positions as school teachers, teacher?s assistants, aides, and mentors, while acting speci?cally on behalf of PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive. 123, Because of young age and relationship with YODER and/or DOES-1 to 5, inclusive, as a student at CLD, E.S. was unable to easily terminate his student-teaciher relationship with YODER and/0r DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 124. Because of the position of authority YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, had over ES, and mental and emotional state, and his young age under the age of consent, E.S. was unable to, and did not give meaningful consent to such acts. 125. Even though PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, knew or had reason to know of these activities by YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, did nothing to investigate, supervise or monitor YODER and/or DOES 1 Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 29 and Demand for July Trial 1 to 5, inclusive, to ensure the safety of the minor students, including ES. 2 126. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, had prior knowledge of the 3 misconduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, including over 20 years of complaints 4 against YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, and the sexual abuse and/or inappropriate sexual 5 conduct at CLD. Yet, PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, failed to take any actions 6 against YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, 7 knew or should have known, of the misconduct of YODER and/ or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, but 8 nonetheless allowed YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, to continue working as a teacher, 9 aide, mentor and/or counselor. PSUSD, LITTLE and/or DOES 6 to 25, inclusive, rati?ed the 10 conduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, by permitting YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, 11 inclusive, to continue teaching after PSUSD, LITTLE and/ or DOES 6 to 25 inclusive, knew of the 12 misconduct of YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive. 13 127. As a direct and proximate result of said sexual harassment, E.S. has suffered and 14 continues to suffer pain, discomfort, anxiety, extreme emotional distress, embarrassment, 15 humiliation, depression, shock and injury to his personal dignity, as well as substantial losses in 16 medical expenses, loss of future earnings and/or earning capacity, if any, and other damages, all in 17 an amount according to proof and in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this 18 Court. If the Court requires, E.S. shall seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint with the exact 19 amount of his damages when the same has been ascertained. 20 128. The aforementioned conduct of LITTLE, YODER and/or DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, 21 and YODER and/or DOES 1 to 5, inclusive, was wilful, oppressive and/or was done with reckless 22 disregard for the rights of BS. and was intended to oppress and cause injury to ES, and in 23 conscious disregard of rights so as to constitute malice and oppression under Civil Code 24 ?3294. Said conduct was despicable conduct that subjected ES. to a cruel and unjust hardship so 25 as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages, against LITTLE, YODER and/or DOES 26 1 to 25, inclusive. 27 28 Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 1 30 and Demand for Jury Trial WHEREF ORE, E.S. PRAYS AS FOLLOWS: ON THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: 1. 2. 7. For general damages; For special damages; For costs of suit incurred herein; For punitive and/or exemplary damages; For statutory penalties and costs to be awarded by the Court pursuant to Civil Code 52 and 52.4; For attorney?s fees pursuant to Civil Code 52 and 52.4 and Code of Civil Procedure 1021 and For any other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. ON THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: 1. 2 3. 4 For general damages; For special damages; For costs of suit incurred herein; and For any other and further relief as the C0urt deems just and proper. ON THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: 1. 2 4 For general damages; For special damages; For costs of suit incurred herein; and For any other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. ON THE FOURTHCAUSE OF ACTION: 1. 2. 3. For general damages; For special damages; For costs of suit incurred herein; and For any other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages 31 and Demand for Jury Trial THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: 7. For general damages; For Special damages; For costs of suit incurred herein; For punitive and/or exemplary damages; For statutory penalties and costs to be awarded by the Court pursuant to Civil Code 52 and 52.4; For attorney?s fees pursuant to Civil Code ??51.9 and 52 and Code of Civil Procedure ?1021.4; and For any other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. ON THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION: 1. 7. DATED: April 19, 2016 For general damages; For special damages; For costs of suit incurred herein; For punitive and/or exemplary damages; For statutory penalties and costs to be awarded by the Court pursuant to Civil Code 52 and 52.4; For attorney?s fees pursuant to Civil Code and 52 and Code of Civil Procedure ?1021.4; and For any other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. OWEN, PATTERSON OWEN, LLP B. SUSAN OWEN, ESQ. Attorneys for Plaintiff, E.S., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Glenda Ellis Plainti?? Complaint for Damages 32 and Demand for Jury Trial ADJ DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, E.S., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Glenda Ellis, hereby demands trial by jury as to all causes of action. DATED: April .19, 2016 OWEN, PATTERSON OWEN, LLP By Mtg/um SUSAN A. OWEN, ESQ. Attorneys for Plaintiff, E.S., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Glenda Ellis- 3?3 Plaintiff?s Complaint for Damages and Demand for Jury Trial . . M-010 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, a; number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY Susan A. Owen, Esq. (CSB #143805) OWEN, PATTERSON OWEN, LLP 23822 W. Valencia Boulevard Suite 303 Valencia, California 91355 TELEPHONENO.: 661-799?3899 FAXNO.: 661-799?2774 ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Plaintiff . . SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERS IDE STREET ADDRESS: 3 2 5 5 . Tahquit 2 Canyon Way MAILING ADDRESS: CITYAND ZIP CODE: Palm Springs Cal i fornia 92 2 62 BRANCH NAME: PALM SPRINGS COURTHOUSE CASE NAME: E.S. V. PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al. CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation CA Unlimited I: Limited Counter I: Joinder 6 2 0 5 IS Filed with ?rst appearance by defendant JUDGE exceeds $25 ,000) $25 000 or less) (Cal Rules of Court. rule 3?402) DEPT: Items 1- 6 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2). 1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort Contract Provisionaliy Complex Civil Litigation Auto (22) I: Breach of contract/warranty (06) (Cal. RUIES 0f rules 3-400'3-403) Uninsured motorist (46) Rule 3_74o collections (09) Antitrust/Trade regulation (03) gther InjuryIProperty Other collections (09) Construction defect (10) amage rong ea I Tort - lnsuranCe coverage (18) M855 tort (40) I, - -Asbestos (04) I: Other contract (37) CI Securities litigation (28) I: Product liability (24) - Real Property Environmental/Toxic tort (30) Medical malpractice (45) I: Eminent domain/Inverse Insurance coverage claims arising from the Other condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case (Other) Tort I: Wrongful eviction (33) types (41) Business tortiu?nfair business practice (07) Other real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment Civil rights (08) Unlawful Detainer Enforcement ofjudgment (20) Defamation (13) :l Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint Fraud (16) I: Residential (32) I: RICO (27) Intellectual property (19) I: Drugs (38) I: Other complaint (not specified above) (42) CI Professional negligence (25) Judicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition I: Other tort (35) Asset forfeiture (05) I: Partnership and corporate governance (21) Employment Petition re: arbitration award (11) I: Other petition (not specified above) (43) I: Wrongful termination (36) I: Writ of mandate (02) Other employment (15) l:l Other judicial review (39) 2. This case is - is not complex under rule 3. 400 of the California Rules of Court. Ifthe case is complex, mark the factors requiring exceptional judicial management. a. I: Large number of separately represented parties d. I: Large number Of witnesses b. Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts issues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court c. Substantial amount of documentary evidence f. Substantial postjudgmentjudicial supervision Remedies sought (check all that apply): a. monetary b. nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief 0. punitive Number of causes of action (specify): SIX ThIs case Is - is not a class action suit. 6. If there are any known related cases, ?le and serve a notice of relatedm??ogm esf?n Fi?p Date. April 19, 2016 Susan A. Owen, Esq. (CSB #143805) (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OFIPARTY OR ATTORNEY NOTICE 0 Plaintiff must ?le this cover sheet with the ?rst paperI ?led In the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases ?led under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and institutions Code). (Cal Rules of Court, rule 3. 220.) Failure to ?le may result in sanctions. . File this cover Sheet' In addition to any cover Sheet required by local court rule. 0 lfthis case is complex under rule 3. 400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy ofthis cover sheet on all other parties to the action or proceeding. 0 Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes gnlya age 0 Form Adopted for Mandatory Use CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET S?%als Cal. Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220, 3.740; SUD .0175.? Judicial Council of California Cal. Standards of JudlClaI AdmInIslratIon, std. 3.10 (Rev. July 1. 2007] Pus INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First; Papers. If you are ?ling a ?rst paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must complete and ?le, along with yourI ?rst paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile statistics about the types and numbers of cases ?led. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you most Cheek one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case ?ts both .a general and a more speci?c type of case listed in item check the more speci?c one. If the case has moltiple causes of action check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action To assist you in completing the sheet examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover sheet mUSt be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to ?le a cover sheet with the ?rst paperr led in a civil case may subject a party. . its counsel or both to sanctions under rules 2. 30. and 3. 220 of the California Rules of Court. To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is de?ned as an action for recovery .of money' owed in a sum stated to be certain that' Is not more than $25, 000, exclusive of interest and attorney? 5 fees, arising from a transaction in which preperty, services or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action Seeking the folloiiving: (1) tort damatters, (2) punitive damages, (3) .recovery of real property, (4) r?cbvery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ attachment The identi?cation of- a case as a rule 3 740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt. from the general. tiIme?for-service requirements and case management rules unless a defendant ?les a responsive pleading. A rule 3. 740 collections . case will be Subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment In rule 3.740.. To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must also uSe the Civil Case Caver- Sheet to designate whether the case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3. 400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by completing. the appropriate boxes In items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet mIIst be Served with the complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant mayI ?le and serve no later than the time of its ?rst appearance a joinder in the plaintiff's designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that the case is complex Auto Tort 'Auto Injury/Properly Damage/Wrongful Death Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the case involves an uninsured motorist claim subject to .. arbitration, Check this item . . .. instead of Auto) (Personal injurle . DamagelWrongful Death)? 0 Asbestos (04) Asbestos Property Damage Asbestos Personal Ilnjuryl Wrongful Death- Product Liability (not asbestos or toxic/envirOnmenIal) (24) Medical Malpractice (45) Medical Malpractice.? Physicians &'Surgeons Other Professional Health Care Malpractice Other (23) Premises Liability slip and fall) . Intentional Bodily assault, vandalism) Intentional ln?icItionof 'Eihdtinnalbistress INeglig?ent Infliction of Emotidnal Distress Other. (Other) Tort Business Tort/Unfair Business Practice (07). .. Civil Rights discrimination, false arrest) (notcivil . harassment) (08) Defantaiion (Ie. Ig. slander, libel) . I 13) . . IFIraud Intellectual Property (19) -'Pr_ofessional Negligence (25) Legal Malpractice. . Other Professional Malpractice (not medical or legal) Other Tort (35) Employment Wrongful Termination (36) Other Employment (15) July 1. 2007] CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES Contract Breach of.ContractiWarranty (06) Breach cf?RentaliLease ?Contract (not unlawful detainer - or wrongful eviction) ContractIWarrantyI Breach?Seller . Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Negligent Breach of ContractlII ""Wa?rranIty Other Breach of Connect/Warranty Collections 9.. money outed, open book accounts) (09) - Collection .Casertseller Plaintiff Other. Promissory Note/Collections CBS . Insurance Coverage {not provisionally complex) (18) Auto Subrogation Other Coverage Other Contract (37) Contractual raud Other Contract Dispute 'Real Property Eminent Domainilnverse CondemnationI(1.4) Wrongful (33) Other Real Property quiet title) (26) . - Writ of Possession of Real Property Mortgage Foreclosure QUiet Title Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, or foreclosure) . Unlawful Detainer Commercial (31) Residential (32) Drugs (38) (if the case Involves illegal drugs, check this item; otherwise,- Ireporfas Commercial or Residential) Judicial Review Asset Perfeiture (05) I Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) - Writ of Mandate (02) Writ?Administrative Mandamus WriteMandamus Ion Limited Court Case Matter Writ?Other Limited Court Case Review Other JudiCi?al Review (39) Review of Health Of?cer Order Notice of Appeal?Labor Commisswner Appeals CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Provisionaily Complex Civil Litigation (Cal. Rules of Court Rules Regulation (03) . Construction Defect (I10) .4 Claims Involvin?g? Mass Tort (40) Securities Litigation Environmentaliioxic ITort (30) Insurance Coverage Claims IiariS'ing from provisionally complex case type listed above) (41) Enforcement of Judgment Enforcement of. Judgment (20) IAbstract of Jungment (Out of County) I .. Confession of Judgment (non? dom estic relations) - Sister State Judgment . 5 Administrative Agency Award. (not unpaid taxes) PetitionlCerti?catIion of Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Taxes Othe? Enforcement Of Judgment" - ase - - Miscellaneous Civil Complaint RICO . Other Complaint (not specrf ed above) (4 2) Declaratory Relief 0th lrijunctiVe Relief On'ly Incin- harassment) - Mechanics Lien Other CIOmmercial Complaint Case IOthet Civil Complaint - (non-toit/non- complex) Miscellaneous Chill Petition Partnership and Corpdrate Governance (21) Other Petition {not speci?ed above) (43) Civil Harassment workplace Violence ElderlDependent- Adult Abuse I Election Contest Petition for'NIame Change Petition for Relief From Late Claim Other CiIiil Petition page 2. sz