In September 2013, plaintiffs’ decedent Xian Lin, 56, a Chinese immigrant who worked as a cook, was in his Honda Accord when it stalled in the number three lane of the Santa Monica Freeway, also known as Interstate 10, east of downtown Los Angeles. At the same time, Craig Pound, a maintenance employee for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, was driving a GMC Savana van on the eastbound freeway, following a utility truck at a speed of approximately 65 to 68 mph. As Pound was about to change lanes, he looked over his left shoulder to make sure the lane to his left was clear. However, when he looked back in front of him, the utility truck in front of him had changed lanes and he was confronted with Lin’s stalled car directly in front of him. Pound tried to brake to avoid a collision, but was unable to do so. As a result, the van rear-ended Lin’s stalled vehicle with great force, causing both vehicles to burst into flame, and suffer massive impact and fire damage. Although Lin was pulled from the burning wreckage by a passing fire captain, Lin suffered that led to his death four days later. The decedent’s wife Ma Me Liao, and his adult children, Yaer Lin and Lian Lin, sued Pound and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, as the owner of the utility van and Pound’s employer. The decedent’s family alleged that Pound was negligent in the operation of the van and that the transportation authority was vicariously liable for Pound’s actions through the course and scope of his employment. Pound was ultimately dismissed from the case prior to trial. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Pound was speeding and inattentive, causing the fatal collision. The defendants admitted fault for the accident. Thus, none of the facts of the collision, or speed of the MTA vehicle, were discussed before the jury. In addition, Pound’s name was not mentioned, and he did not testify, as he had suffered that included burns from trying to help pull the decedent out of the wreckage. As a result, the jury was to only consider non-economic damages., Xian Lin suffered multiple traumatic , including severe burns, and died at the hospital four days later. He was 56 years old and was survived by his wife, Ma Me Liao, then an unemployed 60 year old; his adult son, Yaer Lin, then a 36-year-old cook; and his daughter, Lian Lin, then a 34-year-old cosmetologist. The Lin family were all Chinese immigrants who did not speak English, and the decedent’s family each testified through a Mandarin interpreter. They testified about having to flee Vietnam to China in 1978, before coming to the United States in 2002. Plaintiffs’ counsel also presented evidence that, as part of their culture, the decedent was the family patriarch on whom his wife and children depended for everything. The evidence included testimony about the decedent’s leadership, love, and support when the family was forced into refugee camps, where they worked for a bag of rice a month. Counsel contended that this showed that the decedent was an exemplary father who worked long hours as a cook, six days a week, after coming to the United States, so that his family could share in the American dream. Counsel also contended that the decedent read and wrote for his wife, who had no schooling, and encouraged and helped his daughter become a licensed cosmetologist and certified medical technician. Plaintiffs’ counsel further contended that the decedent’s loss was especially hard on his son, who was forced to remain in China when the family left in 2002 because he was too old to come on a child’s visa and was not able to immigrate here until 2011. The son was trained in American-style Chinese cooking by his father and he had looked forward to working together with his father. Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that the Lins lost the family’s heart and soul when the decedent died and that the family would suffer that loss for the remainder of the decedent’s life expectancy, which the parties stipulated was 27.4 years. Counsel also argued that in the Lins’ culture, the patriarch’s importance to the family grew as he aged, and gained more life experience and wisdom. Thus, the decedent’s family sought recovery of all wrongful death damages as set forth in California Civil Jury Instructions 3921, except for loss of financial support and loss of sexual relations. Since the parties stipulated to approximately $75,000 in economic damages for medical and funeral expenses, the only question for the jury was the value of the non-economic damages, which plaintiffs’ counsel asked the jury to award between $80 million and $140 million. Defense counsel told the jury during opening and closing arguments that $3 million was a reasonable, common sense award per CACI 3921.