On Feb. 21, 2012, plaintiff Bonnie Page, a grocery clerk in her mid-40s, was walking with her daughter to a restaurant at 775 Six Haven Ave., in Rancho Cucamonga, when her foot caught on an inch-and-a-half elevated portion of a sidewalk due to an overgrown tree. She subsequently tripped and fell, landing on her right knee and allegedly it. Page sued the property owner, Inland Foods LLC, alleging that it was negligent for allowing a dangerous condition to exist. The plaintiff’s human factors expert opined that, given that the elevated portion of the sidewalk was obscured by shade due to the overgrown tree, it was unlikely that a pedestrian would have observed the raised surface and avoided it. Moreover, when a pedestrian is walking on a sidewalk, he or she is not looking for tripping hazards, the expert maintained. According to Page’s counsel, a restaurant manager testified that she had walked on the sidewalk multiple times a day for 10 years and had never noticed the alleged defect. However, another manager admitted that the raised elevation had existed for some time. Defense counsel faulted Page for not paying attention, and for failing to avoid an open and obvious condition., Page sought medical attention in the days following her fall and was diagnosed with a posterior horn medial meniscus tear of the right knee. She followed up with an orthopedist, who diagnosed her with a parameniscal cyst. As a result, Page was put on an extensive course of physical therapy, which she treated in the ensuing years. About six months post-accident, she began experiencing pain in her right ankle. She presented to a podiatrist, who diagnosed her with tarsal tunnel syndrome and placed her in a walking boot to minimize the pressure on the ankle. Page remained non-weight-bearing for a number of weeks. Her physical therapy also addressed her ankle injury. In early 2016, Page was about to undergo an arthroscopy of her right knee, but the procedure was cancelled after she had complications with anesthesia. As a result, she continues to treat with her podiatrist for her tarsal tunnel syndrome. Page testified that she still experiences constant pain and swelling in her ankle, which prevents her from standing for long periods, walking long distances, and engaging in physical activities. Page was ultimately terminated from her job after her employer was unable to accommodate Page’s physical demands of being able to sit while working. Given that it was not definitive as to whether Page’s tarsal tunnel syndrome was related to the trip and fall, her economics expert presented two scenarios regarding Page’s lost wages. If the condition was attributable, then Page was permanently disabled, and she would have sought recovery of approximately $140,000 in future lost wages. However, if the tarsal tunnel syndrome was not related to the accident, then she was limited to two years of lost wages, estimated at about $65,000. Page’s treating podiatrist opined that it was more likely than not that the tarsal tunnel syndrome was related to the accident, and that it was permanent in nature. Her orthopedic surgery expert attributed Page’s meniscus tear to the accident, and opined that Page still requires an arthroscopy, which was estimated to cost between $15,000 and $25,000. Thus, Page sought recovery of approximately $20,000 in past medical costs, between $15,000 and $25,000 in future medical costs, and between $65,000 and $140,000 in future lost wages. In addition, she sought recovery of damages for past and future pain and suffering. The defense’s orthopedic surgery expert, who examined Page, acknowledged that Page’s knee injury and future arthroscopy were the result of the fall, but opined that Page’s tarsal tunnel syndrome was not. The expert also concluded that Page required no further treatment. Defense counsel maintained that Page had never requested an accommodation from her employer, such as using a stool when working.