When plaintiff Charles Beckman, who had a real estate license, was 61, he tripped and fell on a sidewalk near Lime Avenue in Long Beach. Approximately a month and a half later, he was again walking on a sidewalk in Long Beach, but this time he fell in a hole at the intersection of Orange Avenue and East Broadway. Beckman sustained to his face and an arm. Beckman sued the city of Long Beach. He alleged that the city failed to properly repair and/or maintain its sidewalks, creating a dangerous condition of public property. Beckman claimed that the first incident involved tree roots that lifted two sections of the sidewalk greater than four inches. He alleged the city patched the area, but the tree roots raised the sidewalk section another two inches, causing him to trip over the raised portion. Plaintiff’s counsel introduced evidence that the city failed to patch the additional two inches of raised sidewalk, even though it is required to patch a sidewalk if the height difference is greater than 1.5 inches. In regard to the second accident, Beckman claimed the incident involved a missing piece of concrete between two sections of the sidewalk. He alleged that the city failed to repair the missing piece, causing him to fall into a hole at that location. Defense counsel contended that there was no dangerous condition and that the alleged defects were open and obvious., Beckman claimed he suffered a slight aggravation of his pre-existing arthritic condition in his back after the first accident. Two days later, he presented to a Veteran’s Hospital, where he was given pain medication and released. After the second incident, Beckman fractured his teeth, lacerated his face above an eye and fractured a bone in one of his arms. His friend subsequently drove him to the Veteran’s Hospital for treatment. Beckman claimed that this second accident further aggravated his pre-existing back condition, causing his movement to be greatly restricted. Beckman’s arm fracture healed on its own, but he is left with a permanent scar above his eye and will require three bridges for his mouth. He claimed that prior to the incidents, he was a swimmer and could swim for two hours, whereas after the incidents, he cannot return to this activity. He also claimed that he was in real estate prior to the incidents and was just getting back into the market after caring for his sick mother, but had to take additional time off due to his . Beckman alleged that prior to taking time off, he was making $60,000 with a proven track record, but that after the accidents, it was hard for him to get back into the real estate market with his facial scar and missing teeth. Thus, he sought recovery of $120,000 in damages for his loss of earnings. Defense counsel disputed Beckman’s loss-of-earnings claim, arguing that Beckman had not been working for a number of years.