On July 9, 2009, plaintiff Yu Tseng, 21, a travel agency reservationist, was stopped at the end of the Live Oak off-ramp from the northbound Interstate-605 Freeway in Irwindale, when her 2001 Honda Civic EX was rear-ended by a 2003 BMW 325i, which was operated by Nancy Calcagnini. Tseng claimed neck from the crash. Tseng sued Calcagnini for motor vehicle negligence. She claimed she was rear-ended while she was stopped at a stop sign at the end of the off-ramp. The plaintiff’s accident reconstruction and biomechanical expert testified that the frame damage to Tseng’s vehicle was caused by the accident and that the impact speed was 15 mph. Calcagnini claimed she stopped behind Tseng’s vehicle at the stop sign, and then pulled forward and stopped for the stop sign after Tseng proceeded forward. She claimed she then looked to her left for traffic and, after determining it was clear to proceed forward, took her foot off the brake pedal and applied the accelerator while looking forward. However, she claimed that Tseng had stopped 2 to 3 feet in front of her vehicle for no apparent reason, causing her to “bump” the rear of Tseng’s vehicle. Calcagnini estimated that she was only moving at a speed of 2 to 3 mph when she “bumped” Tseng’s vehicle. Defense counsel argued that Tseng caused or, at the very least, contributed to the accident by stopping for no apparent reason. Counsel also argued that the minor nature of the accident could not have caused the frame damage to Tseng’s vehicle. The defense’s accident reconstruction and biomechanical expert testified that the impact speed was no more than 5 mph and that the forces involved in the accident were equivalent to the forces a person experiences in his or her everyday activities. The expert also opined that the frame damage to Tseng’s vehicle could not have been caused by the accident, but rather that it was pre-existing damage., Tseng claimed multiple soft-tissue , primarily to her neck. She subsequently sought treatment with a chiropractor two or three days after the accident. She ultimately underwent chiropractic care with her expert on 50 occasions over a 6 month period. While treating, she underwent a video fluoroscopy and an MRI of her neck, which revealed a 2 to 3 millimeter cervical disc bulge at the C3-4 level. Over one year post-accident, she was examined by an orthopedic surgeon and, based on multiple X-rays, an EMG, a discogram, an MRI and fluoroscopy, was diagnosed with severe segmental instability of her cervical spine. Thus, Tseng underwent an anterior cervical fusion at C3-4 on June 20, 2011. Following post-operative therapy, she claimed only occasional and infrequent neck pain. Her total medical expenses were in excess of $180,000, all of which were on a lien basis. The plaintiff’s accident reconstruction and biomechanical expert opined that the acceleration forces imposed on Tseng could have caused her . Tseng, who worked as a reservation clerk at a travel agency, missed two months of work as a result of her surgery. She earned $1,000 per month and sought a loss of earnings for $2,000. The only noticeable damage to Tseng’s vehicle consisted of minor scratches to the rear bumper cover. However, she claimed the vehicle sustained extensive damage and presented a repair estimate which exceeded $5,000, but her property damage claim was ultimately settled before trial with Calcagnini’s insurer. Defense counsel argued that the minor nature of the accident could not have caused any of Tseng’s . The defense’s accident reconstruction and biomechanical expert opined that the accident unlikely caused Tseng’s alleged , as the impact speed was no more than 5 mph and that the forces involved in the accident were equivalent to the forces a person experiences in his or her everyday activities. The defense’s radiology expert testified that the X-rays, MRI, video fluoroscopy and lateral/extension films of Tseng’s cervical spine were all “normal” and revealed no disc herniations or segmental instability. Defense counsel noted that the expert also testified that he would be delighted if the MRI of his cervical spine was as good as the MRI of Tseng’s cervical spine and that there was no reason for the cervical fusion to have been performed. The defense’s expert orthopedic surgeon testified that none of the medical services provided to Tseng were reasonable or necessary. He opined that there was no basis, whatsoever, for the cervical fusion. In addition, defense counsel contended that the only damage to Calcagnini’s vehicle consisted of a paint transfer smudge to the front of the hood, which was “buffed out” at a car wash, and that the repair damage estimate was $19.