On April 17, 2015, plaintiff Deborah Hill, 60, an alcohol and drug counselor, underwent surgery to treat a volar plate avulsion fracture of her left ring finger, which she suffered two months prior, when she fell playing tennis. The surgery was performed by Dr. James Chao, an orthopedist. The following morning, Hill developed severe pain in her left hand, which she reported as 10 on a scale of 10. After failing to reach Chao by telephone, she presented to Temecula Valley Hospital, in Temecula, where she was seen by Dr. Gabriella Minera, an emergency room physician. Minera contacted Chao, who suggested that the surgical dressings may have been wrapped too tightly. Minera loosened a portion of the dressings, but she did not examine the surgical wound. She administered morphine and discharged Hill. Hill returned to the Temecula Valley emergency room the next day, April 19, 2015, with continued complaints of 10-out-of-10 pain in her left hand. She was seen by Dr. Heather Bruner, another emergency room physician, who reviewed Minera’s notes from the day before, performed a vascular examination of Hill’s left hand, adjusted Hill’s pain medication dosage, and discharged Hill home with instructions to see Chao the next day. (Bruner did not recall or chart whether she examined the surgical site, and she did not contact Chao.) On Monday, April 20, 2015, Hill presented to Chao. After removing the dressings, Chao noted that the surgical site was engorged and that blood flow was compromised. He treated the condition conservatively, reassuring Hill and instructing her to return in two weeks. However, the following day, Hill was shaking uncontrollably and complaining of 10-out-of-10 pain in her left hand. Chao saw Hill emergently, noted increased swelling at the surgical site, and admitted her to the hospital for four days of pain management and hyperbaric therapy. Following her discharge from the hospital, Hill left Chao’s care and sought treatment from a hand surgeon, who diagnosed her with nerve damage to her left hand and contracture of the left ring finger. Hill’s left finger remained extremely painful, and stiffness began to compromise the range of motion of her other fingers. As a result, Hill elected to undergo a ray amputation of the finger, which is the removal of an entire finger along with the corresponding metacarpal bones in the hand, three months after Chao’s surgery. Hill sued Chao; emergency room physicians Minera and Bruner; Temecula Valley Hospital Inc.; and another hospital, Sharp Memorial Hospital. Before trial, Hill dismissed Minera, and the hospitals were dismissed via motions for summary judgment. The matter continued against Chao and Bruner. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Chao was negligent for wrapping the surgical dressings too tightly and for failing to return Hill’s phone calls or examine her over the weekend. Counsel also contended that Bruner was negligent for failing to completely loosen the dressings, examine the finger or contact Chao. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that the doctors’ negligence constituted medical malpractice. Chao and Bruner claimed that Hill’s residual hand problems were the result of an unsuccessful surgery, rather than any post-operative vascular compromise, and that they acted reasonably and within the standard of care in their treatment of Hill., Hill developed nerve damage to her left hand and contracture of the left ring finger. She ultimately required a ray amputation of the left ring finger. Post-operatively the stiffness in the left hand and fingers continued, resulting in contractures of the third finger and pinky. She also claimed she developed even more pain in her left hand as a result of her developing complex regional pain syndrome, also known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy or causalgia, a chronic pain condition. Hill claimed that she suffers from cognitive impairment, mental fog, short term memory loss, an inability to concentrate, impaired critical thinking, and impaired decision making due to her daily, severe pain in her left hand. She also claimed she suffers from emotional , including anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, loss of self-worth and self-esteem, anger, and irritability. Hill, a former alcoholic, was a prominent, respected and well known alcohol and drug counselor. However, she claimed her rendered her permanently disabled and unable to work at her drug and alcohol rehabilitation business. Hill sought recovery of $558,380 for lost earnings, $73,039 for home maintenance service costs and $21,863.22 for out-of-pocket medical expenses. She also sought recovery of substantial non-economic damages for her past and future pain and suffering. Hill’s husband, Rocky Hill, then 66, also a drug and alcohol counselor, sought recovery of unspecified damages for his loss of consortium. Defense counsel presented excerpts from the social media accounts of Ms. Hill’s family and friends, which included photos and videos. Counsel also presented a sub rosa surveillance video of Ms. Hill. Defense counsel argued that while photos and videos showed that Ms. Hill was disabled, they also should that Ms. Hill was not disabled to the extent she claimed. The defense’s pain management expert opined that Ms. Hill was not pursuing effective therapy and was likely addicted to opioid painkillers, which were not controlling her pain and were inhibiting her ability to return to work.