On June 8, 2014, plaintiffs’ decedent Nancy Bartels, 68, a retired elementary school teacher, was driving a 2011 Honda Civic north on Cabrillo Highway, also known as State Route 1, near Rio Del Mar, on her way to church. As she slowed for traffic near the Freedom Boulevard off-ramp, her car was rear-ended by a Ford F-150 pickup truck driven by Timothy Carilli. The Honda then veered onto the right shoulder, accelerated to between 90 and 100 mph, went out of control, and rolled four or five times. During the rollover, Bartels remained restrained inside the vehicle, but sustained fatal . At the time of the initial impact, Carilli was talking on his cell phone, hands-free. He was in the course and scope of his employment with Granite Construction Inc. and/or Granite Construction Co. The decedent’s husband, plaintiff Ronald Goodman, and her two adult children, plaintiffs Nicolas Sanchez and Teresa Bartels, sued Carilli and the Granite Construction entities. The decedent’s family alleged that Carilli was negligent in the operation of the pickup truck and that the Granite Construction entities were vicariously liable of Carilli’s actions during the course and scope of his employment. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Carilli was negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout, driving too fast, following too closely, and failing to brake or turn to avoid the collision. Counsel also contended that the rear-end collision was a substantial factor in causing the subsequent fatal rollover. The plaintiffs’ accident reconstruction and biomechanical experts opined that the force of the rear impact caused 15 to 17 inches of crush damage to the Honda’s metal rear bumper and caused the trunk to open. The experts further opined that the closing speed between the pickup and the Honda was 20 to 22 mph, and that the pickup weighed more than twice as much as the Honda. Thus, the experts opined that the resulting peak acceleration of Bartels’ head and brain could have been as high as 60 Gs, a level at which concussions have been documented in young athletes. The plaintiffs’ experts concluded that the slightly offset rear impact likely caused Bartels’ leg and foot to come off the brake and come down on the gas pedal, causing her to press the gas, thinking her foot was still on the brake, which resulted in the unintended acceleration that led to the fatal rollover. According to plaintiffs’ counsel, the defense could offer no other reasonable explanation for the acceleration. Investigators concluded that there were no objects in the Honda or in the debris field that could have depressed the gas pedal, and the Highway Patrol Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team failed to identify any pre-accident conditions that would have caused the acceleration. In addition, 2011 Honda Civics had no reported history of sudden, unintended acceleration or related recalls. Plaintiffs’ counsel also argued that the decedent had no motive to speed away from the scene, as she was licensed and insured, had a clean driving record, had no drugs in her system, and was in good health, with no history of mental or psychological problems. The defendants admitted liability for the rear-end collision, but denied the impact was a substantial factor, as opposed to a trivial or remote factor, in causing the subsequent rollover. Defense counsel asserted that the rear impact and rollover were two distinct, unrelated accidents, noting that the rollover occurred almost a mile away from the rear impact and that the police prepared two separate collision reports. Thus, counsel asserted that the plaintiffs’ experts’ theories about the accident were pure speculation, unsupported by substantial evidence. The defense’s accident-reconstruction expert opined that the change in velocity of the Honda from the rear impact was only 16 to 17 mph, and that this change was insufficient to cause a concussion or mild traumatic brain injury. The expert also testified that the fatal rollover accident occurred 42 to 44 seconds after the rear impact and that the decedent had to be steering the Honda as it travelled along the right shoulder, past traffic that was stopped or slowed. The defense’s expert accident reconstructionist further opined that, if the decedent was experiencing “pedal error,” thinking that she was pressing the brake instead of the gas, the Honda would have accelerated to 120 to 130 mph before the rollover, instead of between 90 and 100 mph. The defense’s automotive expert described possible scenarios for component failure on the Honda, but plaintiffs’ counsel contended that none of those scenarios were supported by any evidence. Defense counsel retained a forensic video expert, who prepared a live-action “drive-through” video of the Honda’s path from the rear impact along the shoulder to the point at which it rolled over. In addition, defense counsel retained a human-factors expert, who opined that pedal error or misapplication was a possible, but unlikely, cause of the Honda’s acceleration and rollover. A more likely factor, he said, was some undetermined mechanical, electrical, or electronic malfunction., Nancy Bartels sustained blunt force trauma to her head, resulting in massive skull fractures. She was subsequently pronounced dead at the scene. She was 68 years old. The decedent was survived by her husband, Ronald Goodman, 80; her adult son, Nicolas Sanchez, 31, a plumbing project manager; and her adult daughter, Teresa Bartels, 29, a child-care provider. Thus, the decedent’s family sought recovery of damages for the decedent’s wrongful death and their loss of consortium. The plaintiffs’ expert economist opined that the present value of the loss of the decedent’s financial support and household services was $1,041,120. The defense’s expert economist opined that the present value of the plaintiffs’ economic loss was no more than $718,878.