Nia Cleveland sued a massage spa after a therapist sexually assaulted her during a session. She alleged that the spa was responsible under premises-liability and negligent-employment theories and sought punitive damages and attorney fees. The trial court granted the spa summary judgment on all claims and entered a protective order concerning depositions. The Court of Appeals held that the evidence created a jury question on whether the assault was reasonably foreseeable for purposes of premises liability. It therefore reversed summary judgment on that claim and on the derivative claims for punitive damages and attorney fees. The court reached a different result on negligent employment, holding that Cleveland had not shown a triable issue under that theory. Because the protective order had been based on the judgment resolving all claims, the court vacated that order as well. The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and vacated in part.