On July 2, 2010, plaintiff Sandra Boether, 64, an interior designer, underwent two routine chiropractic adjustment moves by her chiropractor, Thong Huu Nguyen, D.C. Boether claimed the adjustments caused an immediate onset of pain in her right shoulder, which she described as being similar to the sound of a 2×4 piece of wood breaking. Boether sued Thong Huu Nguyen, D.C. (who was initially erroneously sued as “Huyen Nguyen, DC”). Boether alleged that Nguyen failed to properly perform the adjustment, failed to diagnose an injury to her shoulder, and failed to refer her to a physician. She also alleged that Nguyen’s failures constituted medical malpractice. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Nguyen admitted the adjustments caused Boether pain, but that Nguyen did not know the diagnoses or the differential diagnosis. Counsel also contended that Nguyen did not make a referral, but offered would to treat Boether’s right shoulder area for free. The plaintiff’s chiropractic expert testified that there was negligence in connection with the adjustments done by Nguyen and that Nguyen breached the standard of care by using too much force. The expert also submitted a demonstration picture. The defense’s chiropractic expert denied that there was negligence in connection was the adjustments performed by Nguyen., Boether claimed she left Nguyen’s office on the first day after three hours with severe pain of her right, dominant shoulder, which radiated down the right side and into her hand. She subsequently embarked on a long course of care with many healthcare providers and was eventually diagnosed with complex regional pain syndrome, also known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy or causalgia, a chronic pain condition. At the time of the incident, Boether was self-employed as an interior decorator, but claimed she had to stop working due to her . At trial, she presented in a wheelchair, and it was asserted that she was in the wheelchair due to extensive chronic pain. Several of the plaintiff’s experts testified that Boether unquestionably suffered from severe CRPS. The plaintiff’s pain management expert testified that he has seen over 1,000 people with definite CRPS and opined that Boether’s CRPS had migrated to the entirety of her body. The plaintiffs’ experts further opined that Boether needs 24/7 care from an assistant and that the value of this future care would be in excess of $3.5 million. Thus, Boether sought $200,000 in past medical costs, approximately $4.5 million in future medical costs, and unspecified amounts of damages for her loss of earnings, and past and future pain and suffering. Her husband, Norman Boether, sought recovery of damages for his loss of consortium. Defense counsel disputed Boether’s assertions about immediate pain and running out of the facility. Counsel presented testimony that alleged that Boether remained calm after reporting a benign sound of popping in her shoulder and that Boether asked Nguyen to adjust it. Testimony also alleged that Boether stopped at the front desk on her way out and paid in advance for her next visit. Two of the defense’s experts testified that Boether did not have CRPS. They also testified that despite the fact that Boether’s right hand was alleged to be nearly useless, there was never any evidence of atrophy in that arm in comparison to the other arm. In response, plaintiff’s counsel contended the defense’s expert rheumatologist never examined Boether, but only reviewed past records, and made a chronology after his deposition.