On May 27, 2012, plaintiff Victor Solorzano, 49, a grocery store owner, was riding his motorcycle on the eastbound exit ramp of Interstate 80, toward its interchange with Richmond Parkway, in Richmond. Meanwhile, Rayana Pitts-Godfrey was driving on the eastbound side of Richmond Parkway, toward its intersection with the Interstate 80 exit ramp. As Solorzano proceeded into the intersection at Richmond Parkway, his motorcycle was broadsided by Pitts-Godfrey’s vehicle, throwing him off of his bike and onto the pavement. Solorzano claimed to his left ankle, right wrist, and left shoulder. Solorzano sued Pitts-Godfrey and the vehicle’s owner, Joyce Roberson. Solorzano alleged that Pitts-Godfrey was negligent in the operation of her vehicle and that Roberson was vicariously liable for PItts-Godfrey’s actions. Solorzano claimed that the light was green for eastbound traffic on the Interstate 80 exit ramp. Thus, he contended that he possessed the right of way and that Pitts-Godfrey ran a red light. Plaintiff’s counsel also contended that when police responded to the scene, Solorzano told the reporting officer that his light was green when he entered the intersection and that when asked what color Pitts-Godfrey’s light was, Pitts-Godfrey stated, “Is there a light there?” Counsel further contended that Pitts-Godfrey testified at deposition that she did not remember what color the light was when she entered the intersection. At trial, Pitts-Godfrey claimed that the light for all traffic on Richmond Parkway was green and that Solorzano ran a red light. She also claimed that she did not see Solorzano’s motorcycle prior to the moment of impact. The defense’s accident reconstruction expert opined that, based on the traffic signal sequence at the intersection, Solorzano ran a red light. However, the plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert opined that there was no way to determine who ran the red light based upon the signal diagrams, as the lighting sequence was determined by sensors that respond to traffic patterns, which are highly variable., Solorzano sustained a compound fracture of his left ankle’s tibia and fibula, a fracture of his right wrist, and a separated left shoulder. He was subsequently placed in an ambulance and taken to the emergency room at Kaiser Oakland Medical Center, in Oakland. Approximately eight hours after the collision, he underwent open reduction and internal fixation with the placement of hardware to address his left tibia/fibula fracture. His hospitalization lasted for two days. In October 2012, Solorzano underwent minor surgery to have one of the screws removed from the hardware that was implanted into his left ankle. His fractured wrist was placed in an immobilizer for one month, and the fracture ultimately healed. Solorzano’s dislocated shoulder healed naturally, but he claimed that it continues to cause him residual pain, stiffness and a decreased range of motion. The plaintiff’s expert orthopedic surgeon opined that Solorzano would require future medical intervention for his ankle, such as a fusion or ankle replacement surgery. He further opined that Solorzano has an increased risk of developing osteoarthritis in his right ankle as a result of his . Solorzano sought the recovery of past and future medical costs; damages for his past pain and suffering; and damages for his future pain and suffering over his estimated life expectancy of 27.4 years. The defense’s expert orthopedic surgeon opined that Solorzano would not require any future invasive surgery on his ankle. He contended that the only future surgery Solorzano would require for his was the removal of the hardware in his left knee.