On Saturday, Feb. 13, 2010, plaintiff Calla Felicity, 59, dog trainer, ate dinner at the Round Table Pizza restaurant in South San Francisco with her mother. Felicity and her mother ordered various food items, including a barbecue chicken pizza. Felicity claimed that while consuming the pizza, she swallowed a 1.2-inch chicken bone even though the chicken on the pizza was supposed to be “boneless strips.” Felicity sued the restaurant, Round Table Pizza Inc.; the provider of the chicken, Foster Poultry Farms; and the franchisee of the restaurant, Pizza Bytes Inc.; alleging negligence. Round Table was ultimately dismissed, as it did not operate the restaurant involved, and Foster Poultry was indemnified Pizza Bytes. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that there were 206 consumer bone complaints in grilled chicken strips of the same type involved in this case during the period between 2005 and 2010, with many of the complaints involving children. Counsel argued that Foster Poultry violated its own quality control processes by passing audited batches that should have failed. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Foster Poultry had X-ray technology, which it used on some lines, but only on chicken strips on an intermittent basis. Counsel further contended that when Foster Poultry used the X-ray, it found bones in over 1 percent of all breasts that had supposedly been through intensive visual and manual human inspection. In addition, plaintiffs’ counsel argued that Pizza Bytes did not perform any inspection for bone, based on admissions in depositions of three employees, including the designated corporate representative, and that this violated the rule stated in Mexicali Rose v. Superior Court. Foster Farms and Pizza Bytes both claimed that their bone inspection procedures were thorough., After consuming the pizza containing the 1.2-inch chicken bone, Felicity claimed she had difficulty eating and swallowing, but admitted that she was still able to go about her business on Sunday, Feb. 14, 2010. However, she claimed that she felt worse on Monday, Feb. 15, but thought it was only the flu. She claimed that considered calling the doctor that day, but it was a legal holiday, President’s Day, and her doctor’s office was closed. Felicity claimed that on Monday night, she realized she was running a fever of about 102 degrees and planned to see her doctor the next day. On Tuesday, Feb. 16, Felicity felt much worse and went to see her primary care physician, who told her to go to an emergency room immediately. She subsequently went to the California Pacific Medical Center E.R., complaining of throat discomfort. Doctors ultimately found a foreign body, a chicken bone, in her esophagus, which had pierced her esophagus bilaterally, causing an esophageal perforation, and making removal of the bone very difficult. Felicity also was suffering from an infection and large areas of necrotic esophageal tissue. As a result, she underwent 13 surgeries during her 33 days at the hospital, including a muscle flap reconstruction for closure of esophageal fistula on March 12. On April 16, Felicity required another major surgery to remove the wound dressing for the last time and to undergo a wound closure procedure, during which her left pectoral muscle was floated over the wound and the skin was stitched closed. She then underwent a direct laryngoscopy involving a left vocal cord medialization with the injection of Cymetra into the vocal cord on June 3. Felicity claimed many permanent medical problems as a result of the injury, including left vocal cord paresis, or paralysis of the vocal cord. She alleged that the loss of function in the left vocal cord affects the natural protective system the normal human throat has to prevent aspiration, and that aspiration of food or even saliva can lead to pulmonary infections and aspiration pneumonias. She also alleged that she is at even higher risk for aspiration due to her reduced esophageal sphincter mechanisms. The plaintiff’s cardiac medicine expert opined that the risk of aspiration pneumonia is something Felicity will have for the rest of her life, with the risk increasing as she gets older. The expert also opined that Felicity has difficulty swallowing, as she does not have normal swallowing capability, and that her normal contractual quality of the esophagus has been disrupted by the extensive loss of muscle integrity, requiring the possible need for a future dilatation (stretching) of the esophagus. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that because a piece of the pectoralis muscle was used to patch repair the hole in Felicity’s esophagus and in the side of her neck, this will affect the strength in her chest and potentially her left shoulder. Felicity claimed that she still has a loss of feeling in her left jaw and earlobe, as well as in her left breast. She also claimed that she was left with large scars on her abdomen, chest and neck, and numerous puncture scars from feeding tubes. Felicity further claimed that as a result, she will require three future plastic surgeries. Felicity testified that she continues to have tremendous difficulty breathing when performing moderate activity, such as gardening and walking uphill. Due to vocal cord involvement, Felicity also claimed continuing problems with speech pitch and volume, requiring her to undergo speech therapy. In addition, plaintiffs’ counsel stated that Felicity will eventually need a vocal cord thyroplasty. Felicity’s wife, LauRose, sought recovery of damages for her loss of consortium based on her wife’s . Defense counsel argued that Felicity exacerbated her by failing to go to the emergency room promptly.