On Nov. 19, 2009, plaintiff Nadezhda Kumenko Reyes, 30, a realtor who owned a tax business, underwent laparoscopic gallbladder surgery by Ashfin Eslami, M.D., a general and bariatric surgeon. Prior to surgery, in July 2009, Reyes had an ultrasound that revealed gallstones. As a result, her physician mentioned that Reyes might have to have her gallbladder removed. Consequently, on Nov. 17, 2009, Reyes had a gallbladder attack and was hospitalized. She was subsequently assigned to Eslami, and on Nov. 19, 2009, Reyes underwent gallbladder surgery. However, during the procedure, Eslami admitted he mistakenly severed the common bile duct and the common hepatic duct, instead of the cystic duct. As a result, Eslami performed a surgical repair by converting the case to an open incision and doing a Roux-en-Y repair, which lengthened the surgery from his quoted 45 minutes, to seven hours. However, Reyes claimed that the repair led to a stricture of the gallbladder. Reyes sued Eslami, alleging that the defendant was negligent in the performance of the gallbladder surgery and that this negligence constituted medical malpractice. Reyes contended that Eslami failed to properly identify the anatomy; failed to follow the safe technique of dissection; and that both of these failures lead to the misidentification and transaction of the common bile duct, instead of what he assumed was the cystic duct. The plaintiff’s general surgery expert testified on the standard of care and safe technique to be employed during surgery, and opined that Eslami failed in both respects. Defense counsel contended that Eslami took the appropriate steps to identify the anatomy, but unfortunately severed the wrong duct. However, counsel contended there is a risk, albeit, very low, of a “visual misperception illusion” during the laparoscopic procedure that would make a surgeon think they were operating in the right site, but it could actually not be the right site. As such, the defense’s general surgery expert opined that this was an acceptable risk. Eslami claimed the surgery was difficult due to Reyes’ alleged thickened gallbladder, which he claimed measured up to 10 millimeters. He also claimed he performed the surgery based on the thickened gallbladder. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that Eslami dictated a seven page operative note, but that his testimony at trial and deposition differed from his notes. As such, counsel contended that Eslami was impeached nine times by video deposition. Plaintiff’s counsel also noted that the defense’s general surgery expert admitted that based on the surgical findings, he, himself, would have performed further surgical dissection, based on what he reviewed. In addition, plaintiff’s counsel had Reyes’ pathology slides of the gallbladder reviewed in response to the defense’s claims. As a result, the plaintiff’s expert pathologist testified that Reyes’ gallbladder was not thickened, but was only 1.2 mm thick, while the plaintiff’s expert radiologist opined that none of the slides showed a thickened gallbladder., After the surgery, Reyes had a 12-inch-long scar from the surgical incision on her abdomen. She recovered in the Intensive Care Unit for four days, with one day on a ventilator. Reyes was then discharged from the hospital on Nov. 25, 2009. By March 2010, Reyes had all the signs of jaundice including chills, yellowing of her eyes and itching, which indicated poor liver function. The stricture at the site of the repair was identified in May 2010. She then attempted conservative treatment, which required a transhepatic tube that drained from the outside of Reyes liver to a drainage bag on the outside of Reyes’ body that would collect the bile. Reyes had the tube until June 2011, and she claimed the tube leaked bile and smelled foul. However, when conservative treatment was deemed unsuccessful, Reyes underwent a biliary reconstruction surgery at UCLA in December 2011 to repair the stricture at the site of the anastomosis of the common hepatic duct and the small bowel. During the surgery, the same incision point was used, but was extended by four inches. Reyes was ultimately discharged from the hospital following the repair surgery on Christmas Eve 2011. Reyes, who was married for two months at the time of the first subject surgery, claimed that she relied on her family and friends to take care of her, as her husband was on active duty in the Air Force from January 2010 to August 2010. She also claimed for the tax season of 2010 and 2011, she was unable to work her usual schedule of 12- to 15-hour days, and had to pay others to perform data entry functions she customarily did. Reyes claimed her second repair surgery was deemed successful, as she has gone two to three years with no sign of a bad liver and all her tests showed good results. As such, a stricture would be unlikely. Reyes’ husband, Matthew, was later added as a plaintiff. He sought recovery of damages for his loss of consortium.