In September 2012, plaintiff Exiang Zhao, 68, a retiree, presented to Dr. Thomas Chen, a neurosurgeon at USC University Hospital, and underwent elective spinal surgery to treat the ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. This progressive condition results in a gradual narrowing of the spinal canal, resulting in pressure on the spinal cord. In order to address the problem, Zhao underwent a C3-4 anterior discectomy and fusion. However, the procedure was complicated by a cerebrospinal fluid leak, which caused Chen to terminate the procedure prior to proceeding with a corpectomy, a surgical removal of a bony vertebral body that had been planned to be part of the procedure. Initially after surgery, Zhao was noted to be doing well, walking and participating in therapy, but he consequently developed numerous complications after surgery. On the tenth post-operative day, he became completely paralyzed, causing the need for a second surgery two weeks after the first. However, the second procedure did not improve Zhao’s condition and it allegedly became worse. Zhao, through his son and guardian ad litem, Andrew Chu, sued Chen and the operator of USC University Hospital, the University of Southern California. He alleged that the defendants negligently performed the initial spinal surgery and were negligent in his post-operative care, and that these negligent actions constituted medical malpractice. Richard Robinson, M.D., and Uttam Sinha, M.D., an otolaryngologist, were also sued, but later dismissed prior to trial. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Chen and the hospital staff fell below the standard of care with respect to the initial spinal surgery and treatment of Zhao’s post-operative complications and blood pressure fluctuations. Counsel contended that Chen misrepresented the extent to which the proposed procedure was potentially dangerous and told Zhao that he had never personally had a patient become paralyzed due to the procedure, which Zhao took as a guarantee of a good outcome. The plaintiff’s neurosurgical expert testified that Chen was not below the standard of care in causing the leak, but that one preferable option would have been to proceed with the corpectomy, notwithstanding the existence of the leak. The expert was also critical of Chen for not immediately planning a second surgery to complete the procedure and for taking a “wait and see” conservative approach to the patient post-operatively. Further, the expert opined that when Zhao began to experience some complications, Chen fell below the standard of care in prescribing excessive amounts of steroids. In addition, plaintiff’s counsel contended that after the first procedure, Zhao was not advised of the possibility of needing a second procedure or of the fact that Chen had not been able to fully decompress the spinal cord. Counsel further contended that Chen’s documentation suggested that, at the time of the surgery, he personally felt that he had been successful in fully decompressing the spinal cord, when the post-operative films clearly showed that the surgery was not effective in the decompression. Defense counsel noted that the plaintiff’s son and guardian ad litem attended all pre-operative visits with his father since Zhao did not speak English and the doctor did not speak Cantonese. Thus, counsel contended that Zhao was aware that the procedure involved risks, which included paralysis. Defense counsel argued that Chen’s decision to terminate the procedure upon encountering the cerebrospinal fluid leak was appropriate and reasonable. Counsel also argued that immediate reoperation would have subjected the patient to additional risks. Defense counsel asserted that Zhao was progressing well up until the point where he became paralyzed, and that his paralysis was unexpected and not reasonably predictable. Additionally, counsel contended that the surgery itself did not cause Zhao’s paralysis, but that the paralysis was caused by a complex multitude of factors that combined after the surgery., Ten days after the initial spinal surgery, Zhao became completely paralyzed, causing the need for a second surgery two weeks after the first. However, the second procedure did not improve Zhao’s condition and it allegedly became worse. Thus, Zhao was rendered a permanent quadriplegic. Zhao was ultimately discharged from USC University Hospital to a skilled nursing facility, where he continues to reside. He requires 24-hour care and is totally dependent upon others for his daily needs. Medi-Cal and MediCare both asserted liens totaling in the $400,000 range. Zhao was formerly a “country doctor” in China, but he later became a citizen of the United States, where he worked as a grocery store clerk for 15 years. However, he was retired at the time of surgery. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel contended that after the surgeries, Zhao now has a life expectancy of 7.5 years. Plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury to award $5.5 million in damages for Zhao’s past and future medical expenses and past and future noneconomic loss, which included his past and future pain and suffering. The parties stipulated to Zhao’s past medical expenses being $500,000. Defense counsel did not dispute Zhao’s need for 24-hour attendant care, but disputed the extent of Zhao’s life expectancy and the amount of care Zhao would need. Specifically, the defense’s neurology expert testified that Zhao’s life expectancy would be closer to five years. According to defense counsel, the parties disputed whether or not Zhao would require admission to CareMeridian, a specialized rehabilitation skilled nursing facility; versus admission at a generalized skilled nursing facility; versus returning home with home modifications and in-home care to be provided. Defense counsel also noted that the jury was presented with multiple scenarios from life care planners and economists from both sides. As a result, the jury was presented with suggested damages in a low range of $500,000 over the patient’s lifetime, according to the defense’s numbers, to a high range of $5.5 million over the patient’s life time, according to the plaintiff’s numbers.