Facts

Plaintiff B. Doe, 17, sued Fitness International, claiming an unlawful sexual encounter occurred with another fitness club member, Derek Marks, 31, from February 2011 to June 2011.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that Fitness should have revoked gym member Derek Marks' membership in 2006 after it was on notice of a violent incident involving Marks and underage female members at their facility. In April 2006, defendant Derek Marks, then 26, was allegedly caught taking pictures of two females in compromised positions while they were working out at Fitness. One of the females was a minor. Plaintiff claimed that when they complained to someone about it following his repeated advances, Marks got enraged, cursed at them, threatened them and then allegedly assaulted them by hurling his phone or other object at them. A "member note" was made to the member's electronic file and a warning letter was sent to Marks, whose membership was not suspended or terminated. LA Fitness managers testified that such conduct from a member is subject to immediate termination and revocation of their membership.

Plaintiff claimed that in February 2011, Marks, then 31, initiated contact with Doe, then 17, outside the gym in the Fitness parking lot, and started a conversation that ended with him putting his phone number into her phone. After several meetings at the Fitness facility with Doe, plaintiff claimed Marks persuaded her into an unlawful sexual relationship, which included instances of claimed forced sexual encounters with Marks over the court of several months. Plaintiff claimed there was no mandate for Marks to ever check-in at the facility, and so the two were able to repeatedly "hook-up" at Fitness' facility. Plaintiff claimed the alleged statutory rape continued until an anonymous letter written to the Highway Patrol resulted in Marks' arrest, the break-up of the illegal sexual activity, and his conviction for felony sexual contact with a minor.

B. Doe claimed that Fitness' failure to remove Marks, who Doe claimed was a known dangerous condition, from the facility following his prior assault of young female members was a substantial factor in causing her injuries. Plaintiff claimed that Fitness was on notice in 2006 that Marks was a predator with violent tendencies toward females and that had Fitness put the interests of its customers ahead of its own profits, Fitness would have revoked Marks' membership, consistent with the managers' stated company policy.

Plaintiff B. Doe sued Fitness for negligence.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant denied that it had a duty to revoke Marks' membership for an unsubstantiated complaint and that it acted reasonably by sending a warning letter to Marks, after which defendant received no further complaints regarding Marks.

Defendant denied liability on the basis that it did not have a duty to prevent two members from engaging in sexual relations off of its premises, where it did not know about the relationship, where it did not receive any complaints from plaintiff regarding Marks, and where its conduct was not a substantial factor in causing any harm to plaintiff. Further, defendant denied that plaintiff was harmed in the relationship but rather her emotional injuries arose from not wanting the relationship to end. Defendant contended that plaintiff's relationship with Marks was consensual.

Damages

At closing, plaintiff asked for $18,550 in past medical expenses, $127,400 in future medical expenses, and $250,000 in past pain and suffering. According to plaintiff, Doe asked for an amount to be determined by the jury for up to 20 years of gradually improving future pain and suffering. According to defense, plaintiff asked for $100,000 per year in future pain and suffering for 20 years for a total of over $2.5 million.

Injuries

Plaintiff claimed emotional and psychological injuries.

Result

Defense verdict.

Other Information

Plaintiff filed motion to vacate the verdict and for a New Trial on the grounds that defendant and its counsel allegedly willfully suppressed the identity of a material employee-witness to the 2006 incident.

Deliberation

two hours

Length

five days