On March 1, 2011, plaintiff Perry Mack Jr., 52, a hostler/groundman/crane operator at Union Pacific Railroad’s intermodal facility, in Long Beach, was instructed by his supervisor to operate one of the company’s “cone” vehicles, which permits the worker to drive along the tracks to access the stacked containers and lock them together with interbox connectors. Mack informed his supervisor that he had never been trained on the equipment, but the supervisor allegedly told him, “Don’t worry about it.” Without getting out of the van, the supervisor gave Mack about 60 seconds of verbal instruction on how to control the vehicle and then sent Mack off to work. At about 1:50 p.m. as Mack was driving the cone vehicle over the rails at the break between the “A” and “B” portions of the yard, the machine stopped abruptly, throwing him to the deck. Mack claimed to his back. Mack sued Union Pacific Railroad. Mack alleged that Union Pacific Railroad was negligent in the maintenance of the cone vehicle and that its actions constituted a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Union Pacific Railroad violated numerous OSHA regulations that mandate training, among other violations. Counsel also argued that Union Pacific Railroad negligently repaired and/or maintained the cone vehicle that Mack was operating, in that the emergency stop button had been replaced with the wrong part. Thus, counsel contended that the vehicle stopped abruptly when it went over a bumpy rail crossing at the AB break, which also contributed to the incident. Union Pacific Railroad admitted negligence on the first day of trial. (Judge Roy Paul precluded plaintiff’s counsel from mentioning this last minute change of heart at trial. Up until then, Union Pacific Railroad had vehemently contested liability.), Mack claimed to his back, including an aggravation of his pre-existing degenerative disc disease, which was previously asymptomatic. He claimed his pre-existing degenerative disc disease had never caused him to see a doctor before this incident, but immediately following the accident, he was taken to a clinic. He then received physical therapy, pool therapy, and various medications, such as Gabapentin and Vicodin, to treat his condition. The plaintiff’s treating physician and the plaintiff’s retained experts in orthopedic surgery and pain management opined that the incident permanently aggravated Mack’s pre-existing, asymptomatic degenerative disc disease in the lower back. They also testified that a positive EMG test indicated nerve damage, but none of them recommended spinal surgery. Mack initially missed three months of work after the incident. He then worked on restricted duty, which he performed for nine months until his treating doctor imposed additional restrictions on him — such as no prolonged sitting — due to Mack’s worsening condition. However, Mack claimed that Union Pacific Railroad would not accommodate his restrictions, causing him to take off from work in March 2012. Six months later, Union Pacific Railroad terminated his employment due to a provision in the unique Intermodal Container Transfer Facility agreement. His union, the Transportation Communications International Union, or TCU, successfully got Mack reinstated within a few months of his first termination. However, Union Pacific Railroad fired Mack again for allegedly failing to turn in updated medical information. The trial judge, Roy Paul, severely restricted evidence of the terminations and instructed the jurors that they could only consider the terminations on the issue of why Mack refused to “work with” Union Pacific Railroad’s retained vocational rehabilitation counselor. However, he allowed Mack to testify that he “didn’t trust the company” because they terminated his employment. The plaintiff’s expert economist opined that Mack’s past wage loss amounted to $164,521 and future loss of earning capacity up to age 64 amounted to $549,742. Mack also sought recovery of damages for his past and future pain and suffering. The defense’s orthopedic surgery expert testified that the aggravation to Mack’s back would have lasted three months and that Mack would have then “returned to his baseline.”