Facts

Beginning in 1989, John Caldwell began living with his girlfriend and her two children, including four-year-old Liliane Blumberg. In 1995, the family moved from their home in Napa Valley to Caldwell's vineyard. Thereafter, Caldwell and Blumberg's mother ended their relationship and Caldwell had the family evicted from his home. In 1996, Blumberg revealed to her mother that Caldwell had sexually abused her. Her mother reported the claim to CPS, there was an investigation, and authorities declined to prosecute.

In 2004, Blumberg filed a lawsuit against Caldwell and The Caldwell Vineyard LLC, claiming sexual battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment and premises liability. The negligent infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment claims were later dismissed.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff's account of the abuse detailed several instances where she was sleeping with her mother, brother and the defendant and the defendant either placed her hand on his penis, or rubbed his penis on her body. The defendant also allegedly used his tongue to kiss the plaintiff on her lips and orally stimulated her vagina.

The plaintiff's mother supported her daughter's contentions by confirming that she allowed her children to be alone with the defendant because she trusted him.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant claimed that the allegations against him were made up in an effort to obtain money from him. He further claimed that he believed someone else had molested the plaintiff at some point in her life because she displayed questionable sexual behavior. He also claimed that the plaintiff was exposed to a dysfunctional family life with her alcoholic mother. As a result, the defendant bore the responsibility of taking care of the mother.

The defendant claimed that the plaintiff was inaccurately associating him with abuse she had previously endured. At the defendant's suggestion, in 1989 a psychologist saw the plaintiff. The defendant supported his position that the claims against him were false by stating that the plaintiff's mother brought a palimony suit against him around the same time. Further, the plaintiff's mother, brother and others who were close to the family testified that they never saw anything suspicious between the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff testified that she could not remember if she had ever seen the defendant expose his erect penis or rub it against her. She also claimed she could not remember being asked by the defendant to touch him inappropriately.

The defendant did admit that the plaintiff saw him naked on more than one occasion (e.g., plaintiff would occasionally barge into the bathroom while defendant was showering, shaving, etc.), and incidentally touched his crotch area while the family members were all in bed together "spooning" (defendant contended he was clothed with briefs at those times).

A second potential "claimant" testified that, over 30 years prior, defendant molested her. Defendant denied the allegations with the exception that he conceded he, on a single occasion, and at the request of the sexually experienced 14-year-old, engaged in a sexual act (oral copulation).

He claimed the relationship between him and the plaintiff's family deteriorated after the plaintiff's mother found out he was seeing another woman.

Settlement Discussions

Prior to trial the plaintiff demanded $2.5 million. During mediation the defendant offered $400,000.

Damages

Pain and suffering.

Injuries

The plaintiff, through her psychiatrist, claimed that she currently suffers from bulimia and various stress related disorders affecting her mood and personality that resulted from being sexually abused. She will require treatment at a psychiatric institution for a three-year period at a cost of $200,000 per year. Thereafter, she will require an additional six years of treatment. The defense challenged the extent of the plaintiff's injuries and necessary treatment. Specifically, the defense challenged the need for institutionalization. The defense claimed that the plaintiff's dysfunctional childhood was the cause of her problems and therapy could assist her in dealing with that. Thus, the defense conceded that the plaintiff suffered from a disorder, but claimed, through its own expert psychologist, the disorder was not post-traumatic stress disorder.

Result

Defense verdict.

Deliberation

four hours

Poll

9-3 (liability)

Length

two months