On Sept. 11, 2009, plaintiff Jeromy Houston, 34, a grinder operator employed by Anrak Corp., was working on a construction project at the intersection of Oro Dam Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue in Oroville. On that date, he was instructed by the general contractor’s paving foreman and a city inspector to make an additional cut at or above the intersection. After walking over to a cone that was down with the intention of making it upright, Houston was struck by an end-dump tractor-trailer as it made a right turn from Oro Dam Boulevard onto Lincoln Avenue. Houston was knocked down and allegedly sustained multiple to his left foot, as well as to his left shoulder and ribs. Houston sued the owner and operator of the tractor-trailer, Derek Schies; the truck broker that hired Schies, Bailey Equipment Hauling Inc.; and the general contractor that controlled the construction site, Baldwin Contracting Co. He alleged that Schies was negligent in the operation of the tractor-trailer and that Bailey Equipment was negligent for his actions. Houston also alleged that Baldwin Contracting was negligent in the instructions it gave and its control of the construction site. Houston had also sued Joseph Menth, who was doing business as Kane Menth Trucking, but the defendant was dismissed from the case early in the proceedings. Thus, the matter proceeded to trial against the remaining defendants. Houston’s counsel argued that Schies should have taken a route that would have allowed him to drive straight into the construction site and should not have commenced a right-hand turn after seeing Houston on the ground. Counsel contended that Schies was aware of the off-tracking of his trailer, in that it would go in toward the cone zone, and that he should have kept his eyes on the area rather than divert them toward the oncoming, left-hand-turn traffic. Counsel further claimed that Schies could and should have stopped within one foot when he saw Houston near his vehicle. Houston’s counsel argued that Bailey was negligent for not designating a lead trucker, as per a written agreement. Counsel contended that Baldwin made traffic engineering mistakes in the setting up of the cone zone and that the defendant did not properly route Schies. Schies claimed that it was proper to make a right-hand turn at the subject location and that he could make the turn without encroaching on the cone zone. He also claimed that, as an independent contractor, he had the right to exercise which way he came into the job site. In addition, he claimed that he was never instructed by Baldwin’s paving foreman to come in straight and that it was proper for him to look to the left for oncoming traffic. Schies further argued that Houston was totally at fault for walking backward into the side of a moving tractor-trailer of which he was aware. Furthermore, he claimed that Houston was aware of the off-tracking of tractor trailers., Houston was taken by ambulance from the scene of the accident and brought to an emergency room. He sustained a crush injury to his left knee, as well as a comminuted and intra-articular fracture of the anterior process of the calcaneus. He also claimed a left transverse tarsal dislocation and fractures of the left, non-dominant scapula and left seventh rib, as well as a pneumothorax. Houston subsequently underwent open reduction and internal fixation on his left foot on the date of the accident, and surgery to remove the pins on Oct. 26, 2009. He also underwent a triple arthrodesis fusion of the left transverse tarsal on April 6, 2010, and a second fusion surgery on Oct. 4, 2011. The rib and scapula fractures, as well as pneumothorax, were all considered inconsequential that resolved without surgery. Houston claimed that he suffers from chronic pain syndrome in his left foot, as well as psychological sequelae. As a result, he is currently treating with four different physicians. He also claimed that his have caused him to be permanently disabled from work. Thus, Houston claimed $93,065.98 in stipulated past medical costs, and sought recovery of damages, including $1.8 million for his future medical costs, $115,437 for his past lost earnings, $2,050,975 for his future lost earnings, and an unspecified amount for his past and future pain and suffering. His wife, Jennifer, presented a derivative claim seeking damages for her loss of consortium. Insurance Company of the West joined the matter as an intervening plaintiff. Defense counsel acknowledged the severity of Mr. Houston’s , but disputed the extent of his future medical care needs.