On Dec. 17, 2009, plaintiff Angel Noriega Jr., 16 months old, fell from an unprotected, upper level window at The Beech Street Apartments, in Redwood City. The low-sill, bottom-opening window was located in the apartment unit where he lived with his mother. Angel went through the screen and fell from the window. He subsequently landed on the windshield of a truck parked below, before rolling off the truck and falling to the ground. Shannon Wright-Casson, acting as Angel’s guardian ad litem, sued the owners of the property, Terry Michaud, acting individually and doing business as Heritage Realty and M&R Properties, and Marc Rochett; the property manager, M&R Management Inc.; and the window installers, Vladimir Vaysman, Galina Vaysman, AAA Windows for Less, and VGV Windows (doing business as AAA Windows and Doors). Wright-Casson alleged that the property owners and manager were negligent for failing to maintain a safe premises and that the window installers were negligent for knowingly installing the dangerous windows. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that sometime between July 2009 and August 2009, the windows at the apartment complex were replaced with low-sill, bottom-opening windows, which were installed by AAA Windows for Less. Counsel contended that before the windows were installed, AAA Windows for Less informed the owners of the complex — Michaud, Rochett, Heritage Realty and M&R Properties — that the new windows were dangerous and should be installed with window guards. However, the owners proceeded to authorize the installation of the windows without the guards. Thus, when the windows were opened, only a window screen separated the interior of the room from the outside. Plaintiffs’ counsel maintained that the window screen created a false sense of security for tenants and that Angel’s mother believed the screen was adequate to prevent her son from falling through the window. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel asserted that the property’s owners and manager were negligent for authorizing the installation of low-sill, bottom-opening windows without window guards, creating a dangerous condition, and that despite knowing the risks, the window installers were negligent for installing the dangerous windows. In addition, counsel noted that following the incident, the property owners installed aftermarket window barriers. The plaintiffs’ expert architect testified about his extensive experience in window safety regulations and the dangers posed to children by low-sill windows. The expert also opined that the subject window screens created a false sense of security for tenants. Defense counsel denied that any of the defendants were negligent and maintained that the windows were safe and in proper working order. Counsel also asserted that Angel’s mother was contributorily negligent and comparatively at fault for leaving the window open and failing to adequately supervise her child. Counsel for the window installers asserted that the allegedly dangerous window was a patent defect, but that claims arising from the defect against the window installer were time barred. Counsel also asserted that since the window installers had advised the owners that the windows were not safe without window guards, the installers had, therefore, discharged any duty owed and could not be held liable for the building owners’ decision to install the allegedly dangerous windows. Counsel for the property owners and manager asserted that the replacement windows were installed by AAA Windows for Less and that they weren’t advised about the dangers of the subject windows., When Angel fell from the window, he landed on the windshield of a truck parked below, rolled off, and fell to the ground. He survived the fall and was found conscious at the scene with no visible . He was subsequently taken to a local hospital for observation and released six hours later as neurologic testing, CT scans, and MRIs were negative for a brain injury. However, following Angel’s release from the hospital, his mother became concerned when he became cranky, cried constantly, and refused to eat. He ultimately lost six pounds within a month of the fall. Follow up MRIs, taken one year after the accident, was negative for a traumatic brain injury, and Angel was able to proceed with attending local public school. However, he was eventually diagnosed with developmental problems. Despite the lack of negative medical findings, plaintiff’s counsel asserted that Angel had suffered a traumatic brain injury that would have lifelong effects on his person, such as affecting his medical needs, life care, and earning capacity. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel sought to have Angel recover $3,557 for paid medical costs and an undetermined amount for future care and treatment that was estimated to be in excess of $1 million. Defense counsel contested the extent of Angel’s alleged , noting the lack of evidence of a TBI on the diagnostic CT scans and MRIs. Instead, counsel asserted that Angel’s developmental issues were due to a pre-existing congenital condition. The defense’s pediatric neurology expert opined that Angel suffers from Sotos syndrome, a rare genetic disorder, and that Angel’s developmental problems were caused by the condition.