At around 8 p.m. on Jan. 15, 2012, plaintiff George Wang, 63, a certified public accountant, and his wife, plaintiff Dong Chi, 43, a housewife, were allegedly traveling in a 2012 Mercedes GL450 in Alhambra. As the sport utility vehicle entered the intersection of eastbound Commonwealth Avenue and Marengo Avenue, it was struck by a 2007 Mazda 3 operated by Aleyamma John. Wang and Chi each claimed to their neck, shoulders and lower back. Wang and Chi sued John, alleging that John was negligent in the operation of the Mazda 3. Specifically, they claimed that Wang was driving the Mercedes with Chi as the front seat passenger when John ran a red light and caused the collision. John’s Mazda was deemed a total loss, and the plaintiffs’ Mercedes sustained major damage to the right rear that cost $23,920 to repair. However, Josh’s insurance carrier settled the property damage claim at the inception of the claim, prior to trial. John claimed that the driver of the Mercedes ran the red light, but denied that Wang was driving the SUV. She testified that immediately following the accident, she observed Chi exit the vehicle from the driver’s door and that Wang later appeared at the scene after the accident. Thus, she claimed that Chi was driving the Mercedes and that Wang was not in the vehicle at the time of the accident, but rather appeared at the scene before the police arrived and then told the investigating police officer that he was the driver of the Mercedes. An independent witness testified that he was a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped in the northbound lane of Marengo Avenue and that he observed the Mercedes running the red light. He also testified that he observed Chi driving the vehicle and exiting the SUV from the driver’s door immediately following the accident. In addition, he testified that he did not observe Wang in the vehicle, but only observed him at the scene 15 to 20 minutes after the accident., Wang and Chi each claimed that they sustained to their neck, both shoulders, and lower back. They also both treated their respective soft-tissue with their treating internist. Wang underwent physical therapy with his treating internist on 26 occasions between Jan. 16, 2012 and May 25, 2012. While he never treated with any medical providers since his last visit with his treating physician in May 2012, Wang claimed he still experiences occasional pain in his neck and left shoulder, and constant pain in his right shoulder. Chi underwent physical therapy with her treating physician on 22 occasions between Jan. 16, 2012 and May 10, 2012. She testified that she currently has no residual complaints. The plaintiffs’ treating internist testified that the plaintiffs’ were a result of the accident and that the medical services received (and the charges therefore) were reasonable and necessary. He also opined that Wang sustained a serious injury to his right shoulder, which he believes most likely was a torn rotator cuff. The plaintiffs’ orthopedic surgery expert testified that he never examined either plaintiff, but that after reviewing their medical records and depositions, he believed that the treatment provided by the plaintiffs’ treating physician (and the charges therefore) were reasonable and necessary. He also opined that Wang most likely sustained a rotator cuff tear to his right shoulder. Thus, Wang sought recovery of $4,585 in past medical expenses and a recovery of damages for his pain and suffering. Chi sought recovery of $4,040 in past medical expenses and a recovery of damages for her past pain and suffering. Neither plaintiff claimed a loss of earnings or a loss of earning capacity. Defense counsel noted that the plaintiffs’ treating physician admitted that Wang refused to undergo an MRI of his shoulder. Counsel also noted that the plaintiffs’ orthopedic surgery expert, on cross-examination, admitted that he could not state whether Wang sustained a rotator cuff tear and that the plaintiffs’ treating physician’s findings during examination were inconsistent with a rotator cuff tear. The defense’s expert orthopedic surgeon opined that the therapy rendered to the plaintiffs was neither reasonable nor necessary. He also opined that the findings by the plaintiffs’ treating physician of Wang were totally inconsistent with a rotator cuff tear.