On Nov. 7, 2012, at approximately 10 a.m., plaintiff Richard Valero, 65, a laborer, was retained to refinish a front door at the residence of Ronald Comparato in the North Park area of San Diego. After Comparato provided Valero money to purchase the products necessary to complete the job, Valero arrived at Comparato’s residence and began working on the front door. However, a dispute arose as to the quality of Valero’s work, and Comparato asked him to stop working and leave the property. Valero then packed up all of the refinishing materials in a duffel bag and left on foot. Once Comparato realized Valero had taken some of his items, he got into his vehicle and drove through the neighborhood looking for Valero. Upon locating him, Comparato parked his vehicle and approached Valero to reclaim his property. A physical altercation took place between the two men, resulting in Valero being struck in the face and falling to the ground face-first. Valero claimed he sustain a number of head and lost consciousness. Valero sued Comparato, alleging that Comparato’s actions constituted assault, battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Valero later amended his complaint at the beginning of trial to add a cause of action for negligence. Valero claimed that after he packed up all of the refinishing materials in a duffel bag, he attempted to give them to Comparato, but that Comparato had already went back into his residence. He claimed that since he did not feel it would be responsible for him to leave the items on the front porch, he decided to take them with him. However, Valero stated that as he was walking toward a bus stop, Comparato approached in his vehicle, exited, walked up to him, and took the duffel bag off his shoulder. Valero claimed that he then stated that the bag belonged to Comparato and that he had attempted to provide him with the items earlier. However, Valero claimed that Comparato just reached out and grabbed his hat and sunglasses, and placed both items in the duffel bag. Valero claimed he attempted to reach for his hat and glasses, but Comparato pulled the bag away so that he could not reach it. Valero alleged that at that point, he decided to just walk away from the situation, but that after he turned to walk away, he was blindsided by a punch from Comparato, causing him to fall to the ground face-first. He further alleged that as he attempted to get up, he was kicked in the face, causing him to lose consciousness. Comparato claimed that after asking Valero to leave his property, he went inside his residence for a moment and, upon returning to the front porch, saw that Valero had left with all of the refinishing materials. He admitted that after locating Valero, he exited his vehicle, walked over to Valero, and took the duffel bag off of Valero’s shoulder. However, Comparato claimed no words were exchanged and Valero did not resist him retrieving his property. Comparato contended that as he returned to his car, opened the driver-side rear door, placed the bag inside and turned around, he saw Valero running toward him with his arms in the air, swinging his fists. He claimed that in self-defense, he threw a single punch that hit Valero in the face, causing Valero to fall to the ground and strike his head on a manhole cover. However, Comparato denied kicking or otherwise striking Valero after the initial self-defense punch. Defense counsel called two independent eyewitnesses who were performing construction work on a home in the neighborhood 30 feet from the altercation. Both witnesses confirmed seeing the incident unfold and Comparato taking the duffel bag from Valero. The witnesses also testified that they observed Valero charging at Comparato in an aggressive manner as Comparato was walking back toward his vehicle and that only one punch was thrown. They further testified that Comparato did not kick or otherwise strike Valero, and that they both believed that Comparato was acting in self-defense., On the day of the incident, Valero went to Scripps Mercy Hospital, in San Diego, and was diagnosed with fractures of the right, frontal bone, orbital roof, and medial orbital wall. He was also diagnosed with fractures of the left maxillary, occipital bone, and nasal bone. In addition, he was diagnosed with a right frontal lobe contusion, a subarachnoid hemorrhage, and lacerations to bridge of his nose and lip. After being discharged, Valero continued treatment at a Veterans Affairs hospital. Valero claimed he continued to suffer headaches, general body soreness, fatigue/lethargy, and neck pain that radiated into in both arms and legs, causing weakness. He also claimed he suffers severe cognitive defects from the incident, which has resulted in him becoming increasingly forgetful and confused. Valero claimed that as a result, he suffers severe emotional distress and depression. Thus, Valero sought recovery of at least $500,000 in total damages, including damages for his past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel argued that many of Valero’s current complaints were pre-existing and caused by Valero’s extensive alcoholism, periods of homelessness, and other incidents that resulted in injury. Counsel also contended that there was a significant event after the subject incident where Valero was found by paramedics lying on the street, smelling of alcohol, with a laceration on his right hand and an abrasion to his right eye. Defense counsel contended that Valero was noted as being very uncooperative after that subsequent event and that while en route to the hospital, Valero attempted to punch one of the paramedics in the face. The defense’s expert neurologist, Dr. Jonathan Schleimer, and expert neuropsychiatrist, Dr. Dominick Addario, both testified that Valero’s complex medical and social history made it highly difficult to associate any particular injury or cognitive deficit to the subject incident. The experts opined that Valero did suffer an injury on the date of the incident, but that any symptoms arising therefrom should have resolved by the time of trial. They further opined that any symptoms that Valero was currently experiencing were likely caused by other factors. In addition, defense counsel argued that Valero lacked credibility, as Valero had made numerous inconsistent statements to his treating and retained physicians.