Castilleja School Settles Abuse Lawsuit for $2.25M as More Survivors Await Justice

PALO ALTO, CA – March 10, 2026 – The prestigious Castilleja School has agreed to a $2.25 million settlement with three former students who alleged they were sexually abused by a former tutor, Mark Hodes, who operated on the school’s campus for years. The settlement resolves a civil lawsuit that accused the Palo Alto institution of gross negligence, alleging it ignored decades of warning signs and complaints about the tutor's conduct.

Announced by the law firms of Mary Alexander & Associates and Cerri, Boskovich & Allard, the settlement marks a significant moment of accountability for the school. However, it also highlights an incomplete resolution, as attorneys state a total of 17 women have now come forward with similar allegations against Hodes, leaving 14 survivors without a resolution from the school.

The lawsuit was filed under pseudonyms to protect the identities of the three women, who were minors at the time of the alleged abuse. It named the Castilleja School Foundation and Mark Hodes as defendants, leveraging a California law that extends the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse survivors, allowing them to file claims until age 40.

A Decades-Long Failure of Oversight Alleged

According to the civil complaint, Castilleja School not only recommended Hodes to families but also allowed him unsupervised access to students on its campus. The lawsuit paints a disturbing picture of institutional failure, alleging that warning signs about Hodes’s behavior were present and ignored as far back as the 1992-1993 academic year.

The complaint asserts that Hodes engaged in a pattern of grooming and inappropriate touching during one-on-one tutoring sessions. His conduct was allegedly so well-known among the student body that they gave him nicknames like “Horny Hodes” and “Molesting Mark.” The filing claims that students and at least one employee raised concerns to school leadership, but no meaningful action was taken to investigate the claims or protect the student population.

Furthermore, the lawsuit alleges that Castilleja was aware that Hodes had been removed from another local high school’s campus in 1997 due to sexual abuse of a student, yet continued to allow him access to its own vulnerable students. The complaint accuses the school of choosing to “cover up every complaint they received regarding Hodes’ sexual misconduct” to protect its reputation.

In a statement from January 2025, a school spokeswoman described Castilleja’s current safety policies as “comprehensive and robust,” noting that all employees undergo background checks and that staff receive ongoing training in abuse prevention. The allegations in the lawsuit, however, focus on a long history of alleged inaction that predates these current measures.

The Fight for Full Accountability

While the settlement provides a measure of justice for three women, their attorneys stress that the school’s responsibility does not end here. “The trauma these women carry was entirely preventable had the school prioritized student safety over its institutional reputation,” said attorney Mary Alexander. “While this settlement is a step toward justice for three survivors, 14 other young women have bravely come forward with similar accounts. It should not require a second lawsuit for Castilleja School to do the right thing and provide these women the support and resolution they deserve.”

One of the survivors, identified as Jane Doe 3, spoke to the settlement’s significance. “This situation was a profound failure of responsibility that never should have happened,” she stated. “While no settlement can undo that harm, I am grateful that it reflects accountability, and I hope it encourages meaningful safeguards and transparency so that no other student endures what I did.”

Another survivor, Jane Doe 1, expressed her gratitude to the legal team. “I want to thank Lauren and Mary for believing in our story and for working tirelessly on our case from start to finish. They are advocates in the truest sense of the word.”

Attorney Lauren Cerri echoed the call for broader accountability. “This settlement is a clear acknowledgment of a failure that began decades ago,” Cerri said. “We hope it moves Castilleja to finally address the harm caused to every survivor.”

A Parallel Path in Criminal Court

Separate from the civil proceedings, Mark Hodes, now 74, faces significant criminal charges. He was arrested by the Palo Alto Police Department on August 25, 2020, following an investigation sparked by two women who came forward to report they had been molested by him during private math lessons years earlier.

Initially, detectives identified seven victims, leading to an arrest warrant for nine felony counts of lewd acts with a minor. The number of charges has since grown dramatically. Hodes now faces 55 felony counts of lewd and lascivious acts with children in a pending criminal case in Santa Clara County Superior Court (Case No. B2002177). Hodes was released on bail, and his case has seen delays, but he still faces a significant legal battle that is independent of the civil settlement with the school.

How Legal Reforms Empower Survivors

The civil case against Castilleja was made possible by critical changes to California law designed to give survivors of childhood sexual abuse more time to seek justice. The lawsuit was brought under Assembly Bill 218, which took effect in 2020. This landmark legislation extended the statute of limitations, allowing survivors to file a civil lawsuit up until their 40th birthday or within five years of discovering the connection between their abuse and their resulting harm.

AB 218, along with subsequent laws like the Sexual Abuse and Cover-Up Accountability Act (AB 2777), created “look-back windows” that temporarily revived claims that had expired under previous, more restrictive statutes. These reforms acknowledge the psychological reality that many survivors need decades to process their trauma before they are ready to confront their abusers and the institutions that may have enabled them. This legal framework has been instrumental in holding entities across California accountable for historical abuse and alleged cover-ups.