On Feb. 25, 2010, at approximately 8:25 a.m., plaintiff Ronald Bomberger, 36, an insurance salesman, was a passenger in a vehicle operated by Jamie Reid and traveling west on the 91 Freeway. When they were near the Carmenita area of Cerritos, their vehicle struck the vehicle in front of them that stopped, or was attempting to stop, suddenly. Prior to the impact, James Rumm collided with a vehicle in front of him that had stopped for traffic. As a result, the vehicle behind Rumm attempted to stop to avoid the accident when it was rear-ended by Reid’s vehicle. The impact from Reid’s vehicle then pushed the vehicle behind Rumm into Rumm’s vehicle, causing Rumm to strike the vehicle in front of him a second time. Bomberger fractured his left forearm in the accident. Bomberger sued Reid, Rumm and the owner of Rumm’s vehicle, Rogelia Salazar. Bomberger alleged that Reid and Rumm were negligent in the operation of their respective vehicles and that Salazar was vicariously liable for Rumm’s actions. Reid and Rumm subsequently filed cross-complaints against each other, and Salazar was dismissed from the case for a waiver of costs just before the start of trial. Reid admitted negligence, but claimed that Rumm contributed to the accident. Rumm denied any liability, alleging that he was not responsible for the actions of the motorists behind him., Bomberger sustained a comminuted intra-articular fracture to the distal end of the left radius and styloid process of the ulna with marked dorsal angulation and complete ulnar displacement. He was subsequently taken to a hospital shortly after the accident and underwent closed reduction with percutaneous pinning of the injury later that day. In July 2010, Bomberger and his wife relocated to North Carolina and by October 2010, he was determined to have nonunion of the ulnar styloid. As a result, he underwent open reduction with the insertion of hardware, which was later taken out in November 2012. On May 23, 2013, Bomberger underwent a left lateral epicondylar release with reattachment of extensor carpi radialis brevis muscle, and left lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction with semitendinosus allograft. Bomberger claimed he had a functionally useless arm that would require two future surgeries. He alleged that he would need an ulnar shortening procedure and a subsequent “salvage” procedure known as an achilles allograft. Thus, the plaintiff’s life care planning expert opined that Bomberger’s future included pain medications, splints, orthopedic visits, X-rays, physical therapy, a nurse case manager, a gardener, a tree-trimmer, someone to snow shovel, and a nanny. Bomberger claimed he could not work as an insurance salesman after the accident and had to move to North Carolina, where he is now works inside sales for Time Warner Cable. He alleged that as a result, his work life expectancy was reduced by 11 to 18 years, at which time he would be forced to leave the workforce. Thus, Bomberger sought recovery of $24,000 in past lost earnings, $491,226 to $786,143 in future loss of earnings, and $212,000 in future medical and other expenses based on the presented life care plan. He also sought recovery of $200,000 in past non-economic damages and $864,000 in future non-economic damages. Bomberger did not make a claim for past medical expenses. In addition, his wife, Sarah Bomberger, sought recovery of $315,000 in damages for her loss of consortium. Defense counsel conceded that Mr. Bomberger’s care and treatment of the wrist injury were reasonable. However, counsel contended that the healing was good, if not great, and that Mr. Bomberger would experience some residual pain, which would be controlled by medications, activity modification and the use of splints. Thus, defense counsel disputed the extent of the alleged residual symptoms and the need for any future surgeries, but contended that only the medications, splints, and possibly the orthopedist and X-rays were appropriate. Counsel further contended that no life care plan was necessary. Defense counsel argued that before the accident, Mr. Bomberger was failing as an insurance salesman and was already planning on moving out of California. Counsel also argued that Mr. Bomberger’s current job was paying him over three times more than what he had ever earned in any given year before the accident and that Mr. Bomberger would not suffer any reduction in his work life expectancy. In addition, defense counsel disputed that any loss of consortium damages had been incurred. The parties ultimately established a $991,600/$175,000 high/low agreement during trial.