On Feb. 3, 2009, plaintiff Hubert Spivey, 62, a retired fire captain, was driving north on Lytle Creek Road in San Bernardino during a bad storm. He claimed that at approximately 1 p.m., a tree fell on the back roof of his car, throwing him into the moon roof and rendering him unconscious. Spivey also claimed his car continued another 400 feet, where it struck another tree and threw him into the windshield. Spivey sued the maintainer of the roadway and surrounding area, the county of San Bernardino. He alleged that the county failed to properly maintain the trees in the area, creating a dangerous condition. Spivey claimed that the tree in question was defective and hazardous due its diseased and decayed condition. Thus, he claimed that the county was obligated to cut down the tree since it was a dangerous condition, but failed to do so. The county contended that it did not have notice of any dangerous condition and that Spivey did not even know which tree landed on his vehicle. The defense’s accident reconstruction expert testified that the tree Spivey alleged fell could not have been the same one since it was in a different area. Defense counsel also argued that Spivey was negligent for not wearing a seat belt, which caused his head to hit the windshield., Spivey lacerated his forehead, sustained scrapes and bruises to his knees and was rendered unconscious in the accident. He was subsequently airlifted to an emergency room to treat swelling and bleeding of the brain. At the hospital Spivey was diagnosed with a subarachnoid hemorrhage and his forehead laceration was sutured. Spivey contended that he suffers from mild cognitive impairments as a result of his brain injury, causing him to have trouble remembering things, as well as have trouble with math and spelling. He also contended that due to his condition he can no longer build cars, which was his favorite hobby. Thus, Spivey asked the jury for $300,000 to $500,000 in total damages, including medical costs and past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel argued that the county was not responsible for Spivey’s and damages, since they were caused by the plaintiff’s failure to wear a seat belt. Counsel also argued that Spivey failed to mitigate his damages by not seeking treatment for his alleged cognitive impairments.