On Jan. 27, 2012, plaintiff Jerome Paxton, an unemployed man in his 30s, was riding a Kent Genesis 29-inch mountain bicycle on a sidewalk in Escondido. Paxton had purchased the mountain bicycle one week earlier at the Walmart in San Marcos. While riding the bicycle in Escondido, Paxton claimed the front fork became removed, causing him to crash face-first onto the sidewalk. He claimed he was knocked semi-unconscious and suffered to his head and teeth. Paxton sued Walmart, also known as Wal-Mart Stores Inc., and the manufacturer of the bicycle, Kent International Inc. Paxton alleged the bicycle was defectively designed and manufactured and that the defendants failed to warn of these defects. He also alleged that the defendants breached both the express warranty and implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Shenzen Easing Metal Products Co. Ltd., a bicycle-parts manufacturer based in China, was originally named as a third-party defendant, but was never served. Walmart and Kent International also filed a third-party claim against Overlord Industries Corp., which operated a bicycle factory in China, but the claim was resolved confidentially. The plaintiff’s bicycle expert testified that the fitting between the fork and crown of the front bicycle wheel should have had an adhesive, which would have held it together and prevented the fork from failing. Thus, he opined, the bicycle was defectively designed and manufactured. Paxton’s counsel contended that the defendants failed to recall and/or retrofit the bicycle in light of the defect with the front fork. Counsel also argued, in support of the breach of warranty claims, that the mountain bicycle was represented as being a rugged model and that the failure of the fork belied that description. Defense counsel argued that the bicycle was neither defectively designed nor defectively manufactured. Counsel contended that Paxton inflicted abuse on the bicycle by not using it for its intended purposes; specifically, performing jumps and wheelies, as well as retrofitting the bicycle with a 20-pound gasoline motor. The defense’s bicycle expert testified that the front fork on the subject bicycle was originally attached to the crown using a press fit and that the normally circular tubes of the press fit became oval-ized due to Paxton’s abuse of the bicycle, essentially destroying the press fit and causing the fork to fail., The trial was bifurcated. Damages were not before the court. Paxton claimed the crash caused him to hit the ground on his face, which knocked him semi-conscious and caused multiple teeth dislocations. He was taken by ambulance to an emergency room, where he was held overnight for observation and treatment. Approximately two weeks later, Paxton was examined by an orthodontist, who repositioned the dislocated teeth. Paxton claimed he currently deals with long-term memory issues stemming from the accident. He also claimed he suffers from depression and emotional distress from the accident. Paxton alleged that as a result of his condition, he suffers a loss of enjoyment of life and that he had to re-learn how to play guitar, a favorite hobby. Thus, Paxton would have sought recovery of his past medical costs and recovery of damages for pain and suffering. Defense counsel would have disputed Paxton’s alleged memory impairment, arguing that Paxton suffered no such injury from the accident. Counsel also would have argued that Paxton’s depression pre-dated the accident.