In Randi W. v. Muroc Joint Unified School Dist. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1066, a minor plaintiff sued her own school district and other school districts after she was molested by a vice-principal. The other school districts had formerly employed the vice-principal and had written letters recommending the vice- principal for employment, without disclosing his history of sexual wrongdoing. The plaintiff alleged six causes of action: negligence, negligent hiring, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, negligence per se for violating the Reporting Act ( 11164 et seq.), and sex discrimination. (Randi W., supra, 14 Cal.4th at pp. 1066, 1071-1072.) The prior employer school districts demurred to the complaint, and the trial court sustained the demurrers as to all causes of action on the ground that there was no duty running from the prior employer school districts to the plaintiff. (Randi W., supra, 14 Cal.4th at p. 1074.) The Court of Appeal affirmed as to the negligence, negligent hiring and sex discrimination counts, but reversed as to negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and negligence per se. (Ibid.) The plaintiff did not seek review as to the affirmed counts (negligence, negligent hiring, sex discrimination), but the prior employer school districts did seek review of the reversed counts (negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and negligence per se). The Court of Appeal had held, with respect to the negligent misrepresentation and fraud counts, that the prior employer school districts had made misleading representations as to the vice-principal's qualifications by intentionally suppressing information about his prior sexual contact with students. The Court of Appeal had also held that the complaint stated a cause of action for negligence per se, because the prior employer school districts had allegedly failed in their statutory duty to report the vice-principal under the Reporting Act ( 11164 et seq.). (Randi W., supra, 14 Cal.4th at pp. 1074-1075.)