On Jan. 31, 2011, plaintiff Vickie Wooley was at the Brea Mall, in Brea, with her husband. As she was carrying her 16-month-old granddaughter, Wooley slipped as she was about to go up a staircase to the second level of the mall. She subsequently fell on her left side of her buttocks and chipped her front tooth, as well as complained of pain to her right elbow, right knee, and left hip. Wooley sued the janitorial service for the mall, Township Retail Services, LLC. Wooley alleged that Township Retail failed to properly clean up and/or maintain the area, creating a dangerous condition. Wooley attempted to amend her complaint to add in the mall’s operator, Simon Property Group Inc., as a defendant weeks before the first trial date. However, counsel for Township Retail moved to quash the summons and complaint, which was granted. As a result, Simon Property was never actually brought into the case, and the matter continued to trial against Township Retail only. Wooley claimed that teenagers were throwing water in paper cups from the upper level to the lower level for several hours before her accident. She also claimed that Township Retail failed to take reasonable precautions in response to the notice of the teenagers’ activities. Thus, Wooley alleged that Township Retail’s failure to act caused her to slip and fall on a wet floor. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Township Retail failed to add additional janitorial personnel to the lower level in response to the reports of minors throwing water from the upper to the lower level. Counsel also contended that Township Retail failed to have the area in front of stores that sold food and drinks inspected more often and failed to have sweep sheets documenting actual inspections of the wing in the mall where the accident occurred. Counsel further contended that Township Retail failed to properly investigate the accident or secure the video from mall security to determine the actual cause of the spill and when the area was last inspected. Counsel for Township Retail moved for nonsuit on the ground that Township Retail was not the owner of the property and, therefore, it could only be liable to Wooley for affirmative malfeasance. However, the motion was denied. At trial, counsel for Township Retail contended that Simon Property was the company that could determine what retail establishments could sell food and drinks, where in the mall customers could eat and drink, and whether customers were allowed to bring food and drinks into the mall. Thus, counsel argued that those decisions were all out of the control of the maintenance service, Township Retail. Counsel also contended that Simon Property ultimately controlled the maintenance of the premises and determined the budget on a weekly basis, which determined the number of janitors on duty at any one time. Thus, counsel for Township Retail contended that at the time of the accident, there was a janitor assigned to the lower level whose sole responsibility it was to make rounds in the common area. In addition, the janitor in question testified that she had been through the area where the accident occurred no more than five minutes earlier and found that the area was clean and dry. Counsel for Township Retail further argued that there was no point in having sweep sheets documenting individual inspections when the janitors on duty did nothing but patrol. Thus, counsel argued that the janitorial service had no duty to investigate accidents and that the security video was the property of the mall owner, Simon Property, and not the property of the janitorial service, Township Retail., Wooley slipped and fell on her left buttocks area and chipped her front tooth. She also complained to paramedics about pain to her right elbow, right knee, and left hip. On Feb. 4, 2011, Wooley presented to a physician’s assistant at her primary provider with complaints of left hip and right knee pain. She was ultimately diagnosed with a ruptured posterior tibial tendon and a torn medial meniscus of right knee, and she underwent tibial tendon reconstruction and calcaneal osteotomy. Wooley claimed that although she had ankle pain since the accident, she had initially used an old foot brace for her left ankle and failed to report her ankle complaints to the physician’s assistant. She also claimed that the physician’s assistant failed to adequately examine and diagnose her condition and that she had modified her activity levels immediately after the accident in response to her left foot/ankle pain. Wooley was later referred to a podiatrist whom she had seen in the past for bilateral fallen arches. She was eventually referred to an orthopedic surgeon, as Wooley’s left ankle symptoms increased and she was ultimately diagnosed with a ruptured posterior tibial tendon. Wooley then underwent a tibial tendon reconstruction and a calcaneal osteotomy. Following physical therapy and rehabilitation, Wooley underwent an MRI of her right knee, which identified the torn meniscus. She was then referred to the plaintiff’s expert orthopedic surgeon, who opined that both the torn tibial tendon and torn meniscus were the result of the subject incident. He also opined that Wooley was a surgical candidate for the torn meniscus. Thus, Wooley sought recovery of $60,000 in past medical costs and $27,000 in future medical costs for the knee surgery. She also sought recovery of $240,000 in non-economic damages for her past pain and suffering and $450,000 in non-economic damages for her future pain and suffering. Counsel for Township Retail argued that a ruptured tibial tendon would be immediately painful, with a loss of function, but that Wooley did not complain of any left ankle pain until two months post-accident. Specifically, defense counsel contended that Wooley did not complain of pain to her left ankle either to paramedics at the accident scene or to the physician’s assistant on Feb. 4, 2011. Counsel also contended that Wooley again did not complain of ankle pain during her follow-up exam and only first complained of ankle pain on April 2, 2011. However, defense counsel contended that when Wooley complained of pain to her left ankle on April 2, 2011, she reported that the onset of symptoms was “two days earlier”. With respect to Wooley’s torn meniscus, defense counsel argued that the flap tear identified on the MRI would have been immediately painful with a loss of function, but that Wooley did not report any significant right knee complaints until more than 18 months post-accident.