At around 10:30 a.m. on May 3, 2014, plaintiff Daniel Laimon, 54, an investment manager, went to Dermatex, a tenant in a commercial office building owned by Carole and Antoine Georges, and located at 5703 Oberlin Street in San Diego. As Laimon was attempting to exit the building, he walked down a hallway on the left side of the building and approached glass doors. However, when he exited through the glass doors, he stumbled on a single unmarked step that he did not see and tripped on the curb. As a result, the right part of his body hit the asphalt in the parking lot, and Laimon sustained to his right shoulder. Laimon sued Carole Georges and Antoine Georges. Laimon alleged that the defendants failed to properly maintain the steps, creating a dangerous condition. Laimon testified that he has been visiting Dermatex at the subject location once every three weeks for approximately 10 years. However, he claimed he had never been on the left side of the building prior to the accident. He testified that on the day of the incident, the building’s elevators were not working and that he found “confusing” signs with arrows pointing in opposite directions. Laimon testified that as a result, he was not sure which way to go and exited to the left side of the building, which is the opposite side of where Dermatex is located. He further testified that as he exited the glass doors, he did not see that there were two concrete steps because they blended together. Thus, Laimon claimed that there should have been handrails and paint on the nose of the step to make it more visible. He also claimed that Mr. Georges violated the Uniform Building Code, which requires him to maintain his property in a safe manner. Laimon further claimed that the cost of making the unmarked step more visible was minimal. Defense counsel contended that the step complied with the Uniform Building Code and that there was nothing in the building code that required the building owners to paint the nose of the step and put in handrails. Counsel further contended that there were no prior complaints about the step and no other known falls in the 20 years Mr. Georges had owned and maintained the premises. Thus, defense counsel argued that Laimon failed to keep a proper lookout and that Laimon may have had vision issues on the date of the accident., Laimon shattered the humeral head of his right shoulder as a result of the accident. He subsequently went to an emergency room that day and underwent his first shoulder surgery within a week later. Shortly before trial, Laimon required a reverse total shoulder replacement. Laimon alleged that he would have decreased range of motion for the rest of his life, causing him to have difficulty with overhead activities and activities of daily living, such as putting on shirts, socks, and belts. He also alleged that he would need revision surgeries every 10 years for the rest of his life. Laimon did not make claim for lost earnings, as he would still be able to work at his computer-based job. Defense counsel contended that Laimon did not require the reverse total shoulder surgery and argued that Laimon only required a hemiarthroplasty because he still had use of his rotator cuff. Counsel further argued that Laimon would only be able to have one more revision surgery of the nature of the revers total shoulder surgery.