On June 6, 2009, at approximately 2:30 a.m., plaintiff Juan Estrada, 39, a trainman for BNSF Railway Co., was in the scope of his work at BNSF’s “Mormon Yard” in Stockton when he stepped out from between railcars and into a hole in a walkway. Estrada injured his left ankle. After the incident, Estrada took pictures of the hole and reported the injury to the yardmaster. Estrada sued BNSF. Estrada alleged that BNSF negligently maintained the walkway and have proper lighting in violation of the Federal Employer’s Liability Act and that BNSF failed to maintain a safe walkway in the railroad yard in violation of California Public Utilities Commission General Order 118. Judge Barbara Kronlund precluded the introduction of photographs taken by BNSF managers shortly after the accident that allegedly depicted holes in the walkway in the general location where Estrada was injured. Kronlund precluded the photographs because Estrada could not identify any of those holes as the exact one that caused his harm. Defense counsel also argued that the California PUC Walkway standards did not apply to the yard tracks located away from the switches at the end of tracks and that a “walkway” was not required in the area where Estrada was injured. Kronlund agreed, and she granted nonsuit to that portion of Estrada’s claim and removed it from the jury’s determination as a basis for liability. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that BNSF was aware that the yard was poorly inspected and maintained, but that it failed to routinely inspect the walkways and make any repairs. Counsel noted that federal regulation required BNSF to inspect tracks, but left walkway inspection to the discretion of the carrier. However, plaintiff’s counsel contended that there were many safety complaints regarding chronic lighting and footing hazards in the Mormon Yard. Counsel produced a memo dating to 2005 in which BNSF outlined the need to greatly increase the lighting in the yard, describing the lighting as only 10 percent of BNSF’s own standard lamination. However, plaintiff’s counsel contended that despite the memorandum, BNSF failed to augment the existing lighting with temporary lights pending completion of the upgrade project. Defense counsel argued that BNSF was not negligent and that BNSF’s internal complaint process, which allowed employees to turn in unsafe conditions, established that the workplace was reasonably safe. Counsel also argued that there was no hole and that if there was one, Estrada should have seen it and avoided it. Defense counsel added that BNSF provided Estrada with a reasonably safe place to work, had he followed his training, watched his footing and used his trainmen’s lantern to observe his work area before walking about it., Estrada claimed he suffered a torn talofibular ligament in his left ankle, requiring surgery. After reporting the incident to his yardmaster, Estrada went home to sleep, awoke in great pain, called the railroad, and went to an emergency room. He then rotated between light duty, full duty, and medical leave, but his ankle did not improve. An MRI revealed the talofibular ligament tear and the plaintiff’s treating orthopedist recommended surgery to tighten the ligament. Estrada was then splinted and casted after the surgery. However, Estrada claimed that once the cast was removed, he experienced significant pain that was quickly diagnosed as complex regional pain syndrome, also known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy or causalgia, a chronic pain condition where the sympathetic nerve system is short-circuited, resulting in symptoms of swelling, heat changes, sharp pain, demineralization of bone, numbness, hair loss, and discoloration. Estrada was subsequently given a series of sympathetic lumbar injections, medications, and physical therapy to try to gain control of his CRPS. Work-ups by doctors at UC Davis Medical Center, in Sacramento, identified ongoing laxity in the ankle, bone spurring, and joint breakdown as ongoing pain generators. As a result, Estrada underwent a second surgery in which ligamentous tearing and laxity was found; articular surfaces were found to be profoundly arthritic; major bone spurring was identified and removed; and scar tissue was identified and removed. Estrada claimed that following an 18-month course of rehabilitation, the CRPS continued to give him problems, but he persuaded his physician to release him to work despite medical reservations and continued symptoms. Although he continued to work for BNSF at the time of trial, Estrada’s doctors expressed concern about his longevity at the railroad. During pretrial negotiations, the parties acknowledged that there was a fundamental bar to settlement: the fact that Estrada was able to return to work despite increased symptoms. Estrada was of the opinion that his worsening condition will eventually preclude him from continuing to work at the railroad as an engineer or conductor and that he, therefore, has a significant loss of future earning capacity. However, the railroad would not consider a settlement offer with that assumption. At trial, defense counsel contended that Estrada was not entitled to any future wage loss because he was working at the time of trial.