On Dec. 5, 2011, plaintiff Sylvia Molina, 71, a housekeeper, was walking on Stoneybrook Drive in Sherman Oaks, a street with no marked sidewalks. At approximately 10 a.m., while crossing a driveway apron, Molina was struck by a sport utility vehicle backing out of the driveway. The car ran over Molina’s right ankle, causing fractures to her lower leg. Molina sued the vehicle operator, Howard Meyers. Molina alleged the defendant was negligent in the operation of his SUV. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Molina had passed the driveway when Meyers backed up and turned into her. Thus, counsel argued that Meyers failed to make sure the area was clear before backing up. Due to Molina’s dementia at the time of trial, she was unable to testify as to the details of the incident. Meyers claimed that Molina was six feet from the left curb when he started to back out of the driveway and that the police report of the incident corroborated his account of the accident. Meyers further claimed that according to the police report and Molina’s deposition, Molina did not see the SUV before the impact and that she was wearing a Bluetooth headphone in her ear. After the presentation of evidence, plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for a directed verdict on Meyer’s negligence was granted. Thus, Meyers argued that Molina was comparatively negligent., Molina sustained fractures to her lower right tibia and fibula. She was subsequently taken from the scene of the accident by ambulance and brought to an emergency room, where she was treated with closed reduction casting. Molina then treated through Kaiser and with an outside ankle specialist, who fitted her with an Arizona brace. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Molina now requires the brace and a cane to ambulate, and will continue to do so for the remainder of her life. Counsel also contended that Molina could not return to work following the incident, and suffers from residual ankle pain and loss of function. Approximately eight months after the incident, Molina fell and fractured her pelvis. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that the fall was due to Molina’s weakened ankle. Counsel further argued that as a result of Molina’s and having to retire from work, Molina’s pre-existing mild cognitive impairment worsened into Alzheimer’s disease/dementia. In addition, counsel argued that Molina can no longer travel or do other activities of daily living without assistance. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel ask the jury to award Molina $24,847 in past medical costs, $2,000 in future medical costs every three years for a new Arizona brace, and $100,000 per year for attendant care, as well as for future lost earnings. Counsel also asked the jury to award $234,000 for Molina’s past pain and suffering for the ankle injury and at least $511,000 for Molina’s future pain and suffering for the ankle injury. Plaintiff’s counsel left it up to the jury to decide an amount of damages for Molina’s pain and suffering for the aggravation of her mild cognitive impairment. Defense counsel did not dispute the severity of Molina’s ankle fracture, but argued that the fall and pelvis fracture eight months after the accident were unrelated to the ankle injury. Instead, counsel also argued that the fall was due to Molina’s pre-existing arthritic right knee condition, combined with nerve encapsulation in her right thigh. Defense counsel further denied that Molina’s Alzheimer’s disease/dementia was related to her or to her having to retire.