On Aug. 11, 2016, plaintiffs’ decedent Krish Kulkarni, a 20-month-old boy, ran with his hands outstretched toward the common, enclosed, hallway window, which had a low windowsill, on the third-floor of an apartment building in the Water’s Edge Apartment Complex, in Foster City, where he and his family recently moved. When Krish reached the window, which was open, he put his hands against the screen and it popped out. He fell three stories to a concrete walkway below, and he suffered a fatal injury. Krish’s father and mother, Suhas Kulkarni and Chaitali Prabhune, acting individually and on behalf of their son’s estate, sued the owner of the building, The Sobrato Organization, LLC; a related entity, SI XVII, LLC; the property management company, Woodmont Real Estate Services, L.P.; contractors that remodeled the property after Sobrato purchased it, BKB Construction, LP and BKB Construction Management Inc.; and the designer of the buildings’ remodel in 2014 to 2015, RSS Architecture Inc. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the building was originally constructed as an adult-only complex in the 1970s and that there were no design features implemented for families with children at that time. Sobrato purchased the complex decades later and commissioned RSS Architecture to design a complete façade remodel of the apartment buildings in 2014 to 2015. RSS Architecture’s design called for a removal of the old aluminum, low windowsill windows in the hallways and a replacement with a new set of low windowsill windows that opened from the bottom upward. RSS Architecture and Sobrato hired BKB Construction to complete the remodel. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that, to remedy the fact that the large, low windowsill windows opened from the bottom up, the defendants installed “window safety locks” that functionally limited how far the windows could be opened. When operated properly, the windows could only be opened three inches. However, the window lock devices were easily overridden by simply pushing down a tab and lifting the windows up further. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the feature was designed into the lock mechanics so that, if desired, the windows could be opened fully. On the day of Krish’s death, another tenant had apparently overridden the window safety locks and left the window wide open. The Kulkarni family claimed that the window was only five feet from their apartment front door and that before the day of the incident, they had never seen the windows opened during the two months since they moved in and had no reason to suspect the windows were dangerous. Krish’s mother also claimed that, unbeknownst to her, the window was left wide open, with only a bug screen separating the interior hallway from the outside, and that before she had no time to react, Krish ran toward the open window and struck the screen, resulting in his fatal fall. Plaintiffs’ counsel asserted that Woodmont, as the property manager, and Sobrato, as the owner, were liable for Krish’s death because they were aware of the danger of the open windows and were aware that tenants were overriding the window safety locks, but admittedly did nothing to address the problem beyond closing the windows because they did not consider it a “hot button” safety issue. Based on Woodmont’s head of building maintenance’s deposition testimony, plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Woodmont knew for months leading up to the death of Krish that tenants of Water’s Edge were regularly overriding the safety locks and leaving the windows wide open in common area hallways because of poor ventilation, trash chutes that were full and backed up, and high temperatures during the summer months. Counsel asserted that the open windows exposed young children and pets to the risk of falling from the windows and that Woodmont admitted that it was aware of the danger and would close the windows from time to time, if they happened to see them opened beyond the window safety lock’s limit. Counsel asserted that Woodmont did not instruct tenants to stop overriding the window locks. In addition, plaintiffs’ counsel contended that a Woodmont employee was walking the property on the morning of the fall, looking for open hallway windows to close and that, unfortunately, the employee was just minutes too late. Following Krish’s death, the building owner, Sobrato, removed the ineffective window locks and replaced them with permanent window locks that could not be opened beyond three inches under any circumstances. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the new, permanent, window locks were the only safe and reasonable window locks to be used on the subject windows to prevent death and injury to children. Counsel also contended that fixed bottom, high windowsill windows could have been used so that window locks would not be necessary. Plaintiffs’ counsel asserted that RSS Architecture was negligent for selecting replacement windows that have a low windowsill, that opened from the bottom up, and that did not include permanent window limiters. In addition, counsel asserted that BKB Construction was negligent for installing the windows with that configuration, knowing that safe window-design calls for higher windowsills and/or increased protection from falls. Counsel for BKB Construction and RSS Architecture asserted the affirmative defense of “completed and accepted doctrine,” disclaiming any and all liability because the building owner, Sobrato, had inspected and accepted BKB Construction’s and RSS Architecture’s work after completion, and was aware of the danger posed to children., Krish sustained multiple traumatic and died as a result of the fall on Aug. 11, 2016. He was 20-months old. He was survived by his father, Suhas Kulkarni, who was a 40-year-old software engineer at the time of the incident; his mother, Chaitali Prabhune, who was 37 years old at that time; and his older sister, who was 7 years old at that time. Mr. Kulkarni and Ms. Prabhune travelled from the east coast while in the United States on a work visa from India and moved into the complex with their children in June 2016. They relocated to California because Mr. Kulkarni accepted a position as a software engineer in May 2016 and was working for a few months when the events occurred. A few weeks after Krish’s death, Mr. Kulkarni, Ms. Prabhune and their daughter returned to India. Ms. Prabhune, who saw the entire tragedy unfold before her eyes, claimed that she suffers from emotional distress as a result of the incident. Krish’s family sought recovery of wrongful death damages for the loss of Krish. Punitive Damages were also alleged and attached to the Dillon claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress for Ms. Prabhune.