On Dec. 5, 2009, plaintiff Fu Ming Liang, an unemployed 64-year-old, was walking down Grant Street near its intersection with Pacific Street in Chinatown, San Francisco, when he tripped and fell on the sidewalk in front of the Mayerson Co., a food store. He claimed a knee injury from the fall. Liang sued the Mayerson Co., alleging that the defendant failed to properly maintain the area. Liang claimed that he slipped and fell on a green vegetable leaf on the sidewalk adjacent to Mayerson’s display, which included vegetable and food bins on shelves in front of the store. Plaintiff’s counsel introduced a sidewalk obstruction permit issued to the defendant, in which it stated that the defendant should keep the sidewalk clean “at all times.” Thus, counsel argued that it was for the benefit of the citizens of the city for the defendants to strictly adhere to the agreement and if they didn’t want to keep it “clean at all times,” they didn’t have to obstruct the sidewalks. Plaintiff’s counsel also countered that the defendant did not maintain sweep logs, or any other type of record of maintenance and cleaning. Counsel further contended that a manager from the store testified that he would often have to give employees extra money to sweep the sidewalk. Defense counsel contended that Mayerson’s employees regularly cleaned the sidewalks and monitored it for hazards. Counsel argued that Liang did not prove where the leaf came from and contended that Mayerson did not receive notice to correct the alleged hazard., Liang claimed that he fell directly upon his left knee, fracturing his patella into three pieces. He was taken from the scene via ambulance and ultimately underwent knee surgery, including the implantation of screws and wires. He was subsequently hospitalized for two or three days, and then underwent a course of physical therapy following the surgery. Despite treatment, Liang alleged that he still has some pain during certain motions and would likely need future hardware removal surgery, costing around $17,000. Thus, he claimed he incurred $65,000 in medical costs. However, the court granted the defendant’s motion in limine to allow into evidence only the $8,000 in medical bills that Liang actually paid. Liang stated he was a cook by trade and had been hired for a job that would have started a few weeks after the day of the accident, but plaintiff’s counsel claimed that Liang could not provide admissible evidence as to this, as the person who allegedly hired the plaintiff had moved to Hong Kong and there was no documentation. Thus, the judge would not allow Liang to testify as to the terms of his potential employment, but did allow some evidence from the plaintiff about money he had earned in the past to give a brief sense of some earning capacity. Liang’s wife, Gui Cheng Wang, originally presented a derivative claim, but was voluntarily dismissed from the case prior to trial.