On Jan. 24, 2015, plaintiff Theresa Hollowell, 60, was taking part in a charity 5K run/walk on the sidewalks of Costa Mesa, which began and ended at a parking lot for Road Runner Sports’ store. Road Runner Sports did not obtain a permit from the city of Costa Mesa prior to conducting the event, which had 75 to 80 participants — including children, and people in their 60s, 70s and 80s. The route of the race placed the participants on a sidewalk that went through an area that was under construction, so participants were allegedly required to leave the sidewalk and cross the driveway to get to the other side of the sidewalk. While walking with her husband and a friend during the 5K, Hollowell’s foot got caught on a construction driveway, which had a 0.75-inch ledge that ran down the middle that was covered in dirt, gravel and other debris. She tripped and fell forward, landing on her right knee and allegedly it. Hollowell sued the company that conducted the 5K, Road Runner Sports Inc., and the maintainer or the sidewalk and driveway, the city of Costa Mesa. The city settled out of the case prior to trial. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Road Runner Sports was negligent for choosing a course route that required participants to walk through a construction zone and encounter uneven surfaces, without placing any kind of warning cones on the driveway or having a course monitor in the location to warn participants. Counsel also contended that Road Runner Sports was negligent per se for violating a Costa Mesa City ordinance that required a special event permit for athletic events that was to take place on city sidewalks and other public rights-of-way with 50 or more participants. City employees testified that an event holder was required to file a permit application and course route was three weeks before the event. A city engineer testified that had he reviewed the proposed route through a construction area, he would have required Road Runner Sports to choose a different route. Road Runner Sports’ counsel contended that Road Runner Sports had called the city about the need for permits for other, similar events and had not been required to get one. Counsel also contended that the city ordinance had an exception that event holders did not require permits if the activity was solely conducted on sidewalks and references exempt activities such as picketing, which take place solely on sidewalks. Counsel further contended that Road Runner Sports had the right to rely on the city’s judgment of leaving the sidewalk and driveway open and available for the public and that, therefore, Road Runner Sports could assume sidewalk and driveway were per se safe for its event. Thus, counsel for Road Runner Sports argued that the city was responsible for keeping the sidewalks and driveway in a safe condition and that Hollowell’s fall was the city’s fault for not fixing the driveway or putting up warning signs. Road Runner Sports’ counsel further argued that the fall was Hollowell’s fault for not seeing the ledge. In addition, counsel argued that when Hollowell signed up for the 5K event online, she accepted the terms and conditions of a waiver of liability. However, plaintiff’s counsel contended that there was inadequate proof that Hollowell accepted a waiver, arguing that the nature of acceptance was ambiguous and that there was no proof of the contents of the online waiver. Thus, the defendant’s affirmative defense regarding the issue of an expressed waiver proceeded to a bench trial one month before the jury trial on liability and damages. The court ultimately granted plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for judgment, finding that Road Runner Sports provided inadequate proof of the existence of an accepted waiver of liability., Hollowell sustained a fracture of her right knee’s patella. She was subsequently taken to Hoag Hospital, in Newport Beach, for treatment. However, unbeknownst to her, Hollowell developed a blood clot in her calf during the four weeks of elevated immobilization. As a result, the blood clot dislodged while Hollowell was sleeping and traveled to her lung, where it caused a pulmonary embolism that resulted in a week-long hospital stay. The blood clot ultimately caused post-thrombotic syndrome, which is a permanent and irreversible condition whereby the valves in the deep veins are damaged. Hollowell is now required to wear compression stockings for the rest of her life and she must take blood thinners when flying. Hollowell claimed that she was an extremely active woman who enjoyed wearing dresses, skirts and high heels. However, she claimed that wearing compression stockings severely affects her ability and desire to wear those items of clothing. Hollowell also claimed that she is limited in walking distances, that she can no longer dance with her husband and that she has a major fear of a recurrence of blood clots, as well as bleeding out due to thinned blood when taking blood-thinning medication. The parties stipulated that Hollowell’s past medical costs, which were paid by Hollowell’s insurance carrier, totaled $29,067 for the treatment of the patella fracture and hospitalization for the pulmonary embolism. The court read the stipulated medical damages to the jury prior to closing arguments. Hollowell also sought recovery of non-economic damages for her past and future pain and suffering.