On April 14, 2009, plaintiff Maria Galvan, 51, an unemployed woman, fell and sustained a Colles’ fracture to her right dominant wrist, and a stress fracture to her left wrist. After receiving emergency room treatment, she was referred to the Pacific Orthopedic Medical Group of Alhambra. On April 16, Galvan and her husband were escorted to an examining room where Blanca Mora, a physician’s assistant, conducted an examination, took X-rays, performed a closed reduction and placed the right wrist back into a splint. Galvan claimed that on April 23, Mora recommended surgery or casting and that when she asked what the difference between them was, she was told that the results would be the same, except that with a cast the healing process could take longer. As a result, Galvan chose casting, and Mora again performed a closed reduction with anesthetic and placed the right wrist in a cast. Subsequently, Galvan claimed that she continued to treat with only Moran and a physical therapist at the group. However, when she continued to not see any results after five months of treatment, she complained to Mora, who then left the room to consult with one of the orthopedists regarding the X-rays. She was then referred to her treating physician, a hand specialist. When Galvan told the specialist “Dr. Mora previously treated her,” the expert immediately telephoned Mora and admonished her for not having Galvan treat with a physician. Galvan ultimately underwent surgery consisting of an osteotomy with a plate and 10 screws. Galvan sued Mora and Pacific Orthopedic Medical Group. She alleged that Mora was failed to properly treat her and failed to timely refer her to a physician, and that these failures constituted medical malpractice as a physician’s assistant. She also alleged that Pacific Orthopedic Medical Group was liable for Mora’s negligence. Galvan claimed that she was never advised that Mora was not a physician and that she chose casting because she claimed she was informed that it would heal as if she had surgery. The plaintiff’s treating hand surgery expert opined that Galvan received below the standard of care treatment because an orthopedic surgeon would have informed her that surgery was necessary, without giving any other option, and testified that had surgery been performed at the outset, Galvan would have had 99-percent use of her right dominant wrist. Mora claimed that a physician did examine Galvan, but that the chart stated that, “she (the physician’s assistant) talked to a physician.” Defense counsel contended that the word “physician’s assistant” and “pa” were written on the information sheet clipboard, on Mora’s gown, on the prescriptions and on the letterhead. Counsel also contended that Galvan was recommended surgery, but that she, herself, chose conservative treatment instead. The defense’s orthopedic hand expert opined that the chart was of high quality, that the treatment provided by the defendants was within the standard of care and that the later surgery left Galvan with the same result had the surgery been performed earlier. The expert also testified that his examination revealed that Galvan could return to perform all of her regular daily activities., Galvan ultimately underwent surgery on her right, dominant wrist, consisting of an osteotomy with a plate and 10 screws. She is left with a 6-inch scar. Galvan claimed that she suffers a loss of range of motion to her right wrist and loss of grip strength to her right hand hand. Although she, along with four managers, had been terminated from the bank where she worked until January 2009, she claimed she looked for work, but was unsuccessful up until the time of her injury. She testified that after the injury, she could not operate a computer keyboard, as required by her prior position as a bank assistant manager. Thus, Galvan sought recovery of damages, including $505,000 for her past and future loss of earnings. She did not make a claim for medical expenses. The defense’s vocational rehabilitation expert testified that the reason Galvan has not found other employment is not because of her wrist injury, but because she never told any prospective employers about her wrist injury or limitations. Defense counsel added that Galvan was fired from her previous position and had been unemployed for three months prior to her injury.