On June 7, 2013, plaintiff Dieter Kuster, 56, an electrician, was working on a construction site for a Whole Foods supermarket, located on Market Street, in San Francisco, when he slipped and allegedly twisted his back. Although he did not fall to the ground, Kuster claimed to his back. Kuster initially sued two contractors working on the project, John Sutti & Associates Inc. and Webcor Builders L.P., doing business as Webcor Builders (which was initially erroneously sued as “Webcor Construction L.P.”). The property owner, Whole Foods Market California Inc. (which was initially erroneously sued as “Whole Foods Market Inc.”), and a subcontractor on the project, Key Mechanical Company of Washington Inc. (which was initially erroneously sued as Key Refrigeration Co.), were later added as defendants to the complaint. Kuster alleged violations of Cal-OSHA standards, specifically, a statute that requires worksites to be kept reasonably free from debris. John Sutti & Associates, Webcor Builders, and Whole Foods Market California ultimately settled with Kuster for undisclosed amounts. Thus, the matter continued against Key Mechanical only. Kuster claimed an employee of Key Mechanical dropped a refrigerator pipe plug and failed to keep Key Mechanical’s work area clean. Thus, he alleged that the plug presented a tripping/slipping hazard, which resulted in him slipping on a single refrigerator pipe plug that was left on the ground in the work area of Key Mechanical. Key Mechanical contended that its employees did not drop the alleged plug and that it took measures to keep its work area reasonably clean, as required. In addition, witnesses testified that the job site was clean and reasonably free from debris., Kuster claimed that, upon encountering the plug, he experienced pain and discomfort in his lower back, causing numbness and tingling to radiate from his lower back down to his left leg and foot. He subsequently drove himself to a hospital that day and was initially diagnosed with a lumbar sprain and/or strain with radicular pain. However, he was later diagnosed by treating physicians as suffering a nerve injury to his lumbar spine, at levels L4-5 and L5-S1. Specifically, Kuster contended that the twisting motion caused an injury to the L5 nerve root of his lumbar spine. He ultimately saw three different spinal surgeons, two of which recommended surgery, and one of which recommended against surgery. He also underwent epidural injections, pain management, and treatment with a pain psychologist for his chronic pain. Despite conservative treatment, Kuster claimed that his condition did not improve. The plaintiff’s doctors opined that Kuster requires a functional restoration program, pain management, psychological care, and surgery. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that Kuster did not return to work because his union did not have light duty work available for him and because his condition deteriorated over time, causing Kuster to become more disabled. Counsel also noted that Kuster’s doctors agreed that Kuster was precluded from returning to work as an electrician. It was opined that Kuster might return to work in some capacity doing sedentary work, but at the time of trial, he had not returned to work in any capacity. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel presented evidence that Kuster’s future medical care and loss of earning capacity was in the millions of dollars. Defense counsel disputed the cause of Kuster’s alleged lower back pain, asserting that it was due to his pre-existing, degenerative back conditions. In response, plaintiff’s counsel argued that Kuster’s pre-existing, degenerative back conditions played no role in his injury, aside from making Kuster more susceptible to injury.