On Nov. 21, 2009, plaintiff Holly Dann, 48, a Chief Financial Officer/office manager at her husband’s dental practice, presented to Providence Tarzana Medical Center, in Tarzana, complaining of leg pain and weakness. She underwent an MRI, without contrast, of her lumbar spine, and a radiologist read the MRI as normal and negative for any spinal cord pathology. Dann was then sent home from the emergency room with no definitive diagnosis. On Nov. 23, 2009, Dann returned to the Emergency Room at Providence Tarzana Hospital in a flaccid state with no sensation from the waist down. She subsequently underwent additional MRI scans, with and without contrast, of the lumbar and thoracic spine. The MRIs were again read as normal and negative for any spinal cord pathology by radiologist, Dr. Jack Chen. Dann was then admitted to the hospital and seen by Dr. Peter-Brian Andersson, a neurologist. Based upon his examination and test results, Andersson diagnosed Dann with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a rare disorder in which the body’s immune system attacks the nerves, and instituted treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). One day after admission, Dann underwent a neurology consultation by Dr. Lancelot Alexander, for a second opinion. Alexander performed a full examination and found a curious-seeming thoracic sensory level at T11 on the right and at L1-2 on the left. He claimed that based on the negative MRI scans, the motor and sensory examination findings, and the Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) test results, he felt that the diagnosis was almost certainly Guillain-Barre syndrome. Thereafter, Dann followed up in the hospital with Dr. Justin Dominick, a neurologist. Dominick continued to see Dann in his office for the next couple of months, maintaining the diagnosis of Guillain-Barre syndrome. An EMG study done during rehabilitation confirmed that Dann had a rare, axonal variant of Guillain-Barre syndrome as her diagnosis. Approximately 11 months later, on Aug. 11, 2010, Dann obtained another neurology consultation at UCLA Medical Center, in Los Angeles, from Dr. Perry Shieh, the Director of the Neuromuscular Department. Shieh reviewed all of the MRI films and did his own examination, and concluded that the proper diagnosis for Dann was not Guillain-Barre syndrome, but transverse myelitis, a rare inflammatory disease causing injury to the spinal cord with varying degrees of weakness and sensory alterations. Dann then sought another opinion from Dr. Nancy Sicotte, a neurologist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, in Los Angeles. Sicotte came to the same diagnostic conclusion of transverse myelitis. On Jan. 19, 2012, Dann went to the transverse myelitis center at John Hopkins University, in Baltimore, to be seen by Dr. Daniel Becker, who also diagnosed transverse myelitis. Becker told Dann she was improperly diagnosed with Guillain-Barre syndrome from the start. He also told her that, had she received high-dose corticosteroids during the first 14 days of her presentation in November 2009, her outcome would have been substantially improved. Dann sued Chen, Andersson, Alexander, Dominick, and South Valley Radiology Medical Group Inc. Dann alleged the defendants were negligent for failing to diagnose her condition and that this failure constituted medical malpractice. San Fernando Valley Medical Group Inc., Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Dr. Ravin Jain, and Providence Tarzana Medical Center were also originally named as defendants, but they were ultimately let out of the case. Dann claimed that all of the doctors at Providence Tarzana Hospital, Chen, Andersson, Alexander and Dominick, all missed the proper diagnosis of transverse myelitis. She claimed they incorrectly diagnosed her with Guillain-Barre syndrome and, by doing so, fell below the standard of care. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Dann’s MRIs were misread and actually showed evidence of spinal cord edema, which supported the diagnosis of transverse myelitis and ruled out the diagnosis of Guillain-Barre syndrome. Counsel argued that, had the correct diagnosis of transverse myelitis been made, Dann would have received high-dose steroids to lessen her inflammation and substantially improve her outcome. Specifically, counsel contended that Dann would have been able to ambulate without any assistive devices and that Dann would have had normal bowel and bladder function. Defense counsel argued that the diagnosis of Guillain-Barre syndrome was correct from the start, contending that it was the correct diagnosis then and continues to be the correct diagnosis at present. Defense counsel contended that Dann’s Guillain-Barre syndrome is actually a rare, severe form known as the axonal variant. Counsel argued that although most patients typically recover fully from Guillain-Barre syndrome, those who are diagnosed with the severe form known as axonal variant do not, and are left with permanent, residual disabilities., Dann claimed she suffers from permanent weakness, primarily in her distal legs and feet. She claimed that as a result, she requires bilateral leg braces and a cane. She also claimed permanent bowel and bladder dysfunction, requiring her to self-catheterize and manually disimpact her stool. Dann also claimed she is required to wear diapers. Dann contended that as she ages, she would require more medical equipment, including a wheelchair, and an aide. She claimed that she returned to work on a part-time basis, but that she now has to work from home. Thus, Dann sought recovery of $150,000 in past lost earnings, $960,000 in future lost earnings, and $7.7 million for her future life care plan, as estimated by the plaintiff’s expert economist. Dan also sought recovery of $1.2 million in damages for her past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel argued that there is no reliable medical evidence to indicate that corticosteroids improve the outcome of transverse myelitis patients. Thus, counsel argued that even if the diagnosis was missed, Dann’s outcome would not have changed because steroids would not have improved her condition.