On May 13, 2017, plaintiff Sheila Carr, 51, an auditor/controller for the county of Lake, was driving north on Calistoga Road, in Santa Rosa. When she about 530 feet north of the intersection with Bodmer Lane, her vehicle was sideswiped by a southbound vehicle operated by Johann Jaramillo. Carr claimed to her head, chest and left wrist. Carr sued Jaramillo, alleging that Jaramillo was negligent in the operation of his vehicle. According to Carr’s counsel, Jaramillo was driving south on Calistoga Road when Jaramillo took an evasive maneuver to avoid a rock in the roadway. Counsel contended that as a result, Jaramillo steered to the right, causing the right side of the vehicle to strike the rock-covered hillside to the west of the roadway. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that after Jaramillo struck the hillside, he steered back to the left and drifted over the double-yellow lines, where Jaramillo’s vehicle crashed into Carr’s vehicle in the northbound lane. Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that Jaramillo caused the collision by making a negligent lane change in violation of California Vehicle Code § 22107, which states that "no person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course, or move right or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable safety, and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal…in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement." Defense counsel disputed Carr’s version of events, and asserted that Jaramillo was not at fault for the crash. Instead, counsel asserted that Carr was to blame for the crash., Carr claimed she sustained a closed head injury and a sternal fracture. She also claimed she sustained a non-displaced, intra-articular fracture of the left wrist’s radius and ulna, resulting in 45 intra-articular fragments; a comminuted, minimally displaced fracture of the left wrist’s distal radius; and a non-displaced oblique fracture involving the proximal aspect of the left hand’s phalanx. Carr was taken by ambulance to a hospital, where a joint-spanning external fixator was placed across the left wrist. She later underwent open reduction and internal fixation of the left distal radius to treat the fracture, which included four or five articular fragments. Carr then underwent a secondary surgery for the removal of hardware. Carr was able to return to work full time. However, she claimed that she needs ongoing treatment for her left wrist, including physical therapy. She also claimed that it’s probable that she will require a carpal wrist fusion. Carr sought recovery of past and future medical costs, and damages for her past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel disputed the extent of Carr’s alleged and the need for the future wrist surgery.