At approximately 5:15 p.m. on Nov. 28, 2009, plaintiff Wendy Mitchell, 71, a retiree, was walking down Broadway Street in Sonoma when she was run down by a bicycle operated by Brett Bonfigli, 13. Mitchell had just exited her parked car in front of 762 Broadway Street and stepped onto the sidewalk when her head was struck. Mitchell sued Brett, as well as his parents, Dean Bonfigli and Heidi Bonfigli. She also sued Scott Sherman, who owned the property at 762 Broadway Street, and the City of Sonoma, which controlled the sidewalk under a Maintenance Agreement with Caltrans. Mitchell alleged that the Brett was negligent in the operation of his bicycle and that his parents were vicariously liable for his actions. She further alleged that Sherman and the city were negligent in the maintenance of the location, creating a dangerous condition of public property. Mitchell claimed that Brett was riding his bicycle too fast and without a light at dusk, as well as was traveling in the opposite direction of vehicle traffic, in violation of Vehicle Code § 21200. She also claimed that the city failed to protect pedestrians on sidewalks from bicyclists, since it did not maintain adequate lines of sight in front of 762 Broadway Street. Mitchell further claimed that Sherman was negligent for planting large, Italian Cypress trees in the planting strip controlled by the city in front of his property without the required city permit, causing Brett’s line of sight to be blocked. The Bonfiglis’ counsel contended that the police determined that Brett was operating his bicycle properly and that a light was not required because it was not dark outside. Counsel further contended that the police determined that the accident was caused by Mitchell stepping out from behind a tree and in front of Brett’s bicycle. The city claimed that it had a complete defense by applicable governmental immunities, and that Sherman was solely responsible for the trees in front of his property. Sherman claimed that he was not responsible for the trees in the public right of way and was never given any notice that they were illegal., Mitchell was taken by ambulance from the scene of the accident and brought to an emergency room. She sustained a fractured skull, resulting in an intracranial hematoma with hemorrhage on the right side of the brain and a contusion with a lesion to the left frontal lobe. She subsequently underwent emergency brain surgery on the date of the accident, and remained comatose and intubated in the Intensive Care Unit for approximately two weeks. Mitchell claimed she suffers residual problems as a result of her traumatic brain injury, including weakness on her left side and aphasia, which is an impairment of her language ability. She received rehabilitative treatment that included neurological care, occupational therapy, physical therapy and speech therapy, and was discharged from the acute rehabilitation facility on Jan. 8, 2010. Mitchell has since returned to living independently, regaining her driver’s license, but has residual short-term memory loss. Thus, she claimed she will require future care and sought between $500,000 and $1 million in damages for her future non-medical attendant care. Mitchell also claimed $261,251.36 in past medical costs and further sought recovery of unspecified damages for her past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel disputed any alleged future care, contended that Mitchell has been living in her own home completely independently for over two years after the accident and has been driving her own car.