On April 28, 2010, plaintiff George Crawford, an unemployed 52 year old, was walking in a driveway in his gated community in Los Angeles. He claimed that while he was in the driveway, his next-door neighbor, Alexander Motikov, made multiple homophobic remarks toward him and then struck him with his sedan. Crawford claimed his right arm was struck by the vehicle’s right-side mirror, his elbow. Crawford sued Motikov and the vehicle’s owner, Liana Dubnicka. Crawford alleged that Motikov was negligent in the operation of his sedan and that Motikov’s actions constituted assault and battery in violation of his civil rights. He also alleged that Dubnicka was vicariously liable for Motikov’s actions while operation the vehicle. Crawford alleged that Motikov attempted to drive him out of his home because of his sexual orientation. Thus, he claimed Motikov made multiple homophobic remarks at him both before and after the accident, and intentionally hit him with his vehicle because he is gay. The plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert testified that the mirror height was consistent with the height of Crawford’s elbow and that Motikov’s speed was 19.5 mph at the moment the side mirror struck Crawford. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Motikov’s actions constituted violations of California’s Bane and Ralph Civil Rights Acts, which provide that all persons within the jurisdiction of the state have the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of specified characteristics, including sexual orientation. Motikov denied making any homophobic remarks toward Crawford or hitting him with his vehicle. He claimed that even if he did strike Crawford, it was due to Crawford’s own negligence by standing in the middle of the driveway while videotaping him as he drove by. The defense’s biomechanic expert testified that Motikov was traveling between 11 and 13 mph, and that the vehicle’s mirror was too low to hit Crawford’s elbow. The expert further testified that since Crawford was holding a video camera with his right hand it would not have been possible for the mirror to hit his elbow., Crawford went to an emergency room after the incident with complaints of pain in his right, dominant elbow. He was subsequently diagnosed with an elbow contusion, fitted with a sling and told to follow up with an orthopedist. Crawford ultimately sought treatment with an orthopedist nine months later and was diagnosed with cubital tunnel syndrome, a condition brought on by increased pressure on the ulnar nerve at the elbow, and synovitis, an inflammation of the joint lining. As a result, he underwent three cortisone injections. The plaintiff’s treating orthopedist testified that Crawford’s cubital tunnel syndrome resolved, but that the synovitis symptoms continued. The expert also testified that Crawford’s synovitis was proximately caused by the automobile striking him. Crawford claimed that despite treatment, he continues to suffer pain in his elbow. He alleged that as a result, he has limitations on lifting things and raising his right arm. Defense counsel argued that any complaint of elbow pain was not caused by the alleged accident. Counsel also argued that Crawford had not disclosed to his treating physician that he had been treated for cubital tunnel syndrome in 2007, before the alleged 2010 accident. The defense’s expert orthopedist testified that the impact to Crawford’s elbow, if it occurred, was on the opposite side of the elbow from the ulnar nerve and that this meant that Crawford could not have suffered cubital tunnel syndrome as a result of the impact. The expert also testified that any injury would have been minor and resolved within a few months.