On Sept. 14, 2012, plaintiff Douglas Fallas, a 74-year-old retired man with a history of cataracts and pterygium, a growth of cells along the surface of the eye membrane, underwent bilateral LASIK surgery, which was performed by Dr. Badrudin Kurwa, an ophthalmologist. Fallas initially presented to the Kurwa Eye Center, in Glendora, in March 2011. He presented with complaints of blurred vision, as well as mild, recurring pterygium in his right eye. However, his vision was not impaired by the recurring pterygium condition. Fallas then returned to the eye center on Sept. 14, 2012, to undergo the bilateral LASIK surgery. No complications were noted during the procedure, and three days later, Fallas returned to Kurwa’s office to have his visual acuity tested. On Sept. 27, 2012, Fallas again presented to the Kurwa Eye Center, but this time he complained of blurred vision only in his right eye. His visual acuity was again tested, and a silt lamp examination was performed. The studies determined that Fallas was suffering from bilateral dryness and a recurrence of pterygium in his right eye. As a result, Fallas returned to Kurwa’s office on Nov. 2, 2012, and underwent vision testing that determined that Fallas had decreased vision in his right eye. Fallas sued Kurwa and the Kurwa Eye Center. Fallas alleged that Kurwa failed to provide appropriate care, constituting medical malpractice, and that Kurwa’s practice was vicariously liable for his actions. Fallas contended that Kurwa’s recommendation for the LASIK surgery was not appropriate or safe given his history and presence of mild pterygium in his right eye. Kurwa maintained that Fallas’ pterygium was not a contraindication to LASIK and did not approach/interfere with the corneal flap. He also maintained that he did not transect/breach the pterygium in forming the corneal flap. Thus, defense counsel argued that the standard of care was met and that any complications Fallas experienced were common, known risks of the procedure. The defense’s expert ophthalmologist testified that Fallas’ pre-procedure slit lamp and corneal topography examinations confirmed the pterygium was not present or did not affect the area of the eye where the corneal flap was made. The expert also testified that if the corneal flap had been severed during the LASIK surgery, Fallas would have experienced significant bleeding of the eye., Fallas claimed that he suffered an astigmatism and functional blindness in his right eye as a result of the alleged malpractice. He also claimed that he now experiences chronic dryness in his right eye, requiring the daily use of eye drops, which have to be administered multiple times each day. Fallas claimed that he sought treatment from another ophthalmologist and that additional surgery on his right eye was recommended, which he declined to undergo at that time. Defense counsel argued that Fallas recovered from his eye condition, that any complaints were known complications of the LASIK procedure, and that Fallas’ residual problems could be easily corrected. Counsel contended that Fallas regained most of the vision in his right eye, that he was scheduled to undergo a flap lift, and that Fallas failed to mitigate his damages in that he failed to undergo the flap lift procedure at any time during the four years after his symptoms appeared.