On Sept. 29, 2012, plaintiff Carol McClane, 51, unemployed, was in her apartment in San Pablo when she began to smell paint fumes emanating from the vacant unit below. McClane was taken by her daughter to the emergency room, where McClane was admitted overnight and treated for shortness of breath, elevated heart rate and nausea. McClane sued the owner of her building, Steadfast Investment Properties Inc., and the painter hired by Steadfast to paint the subject unit, Gabriel Guzman Lopez. McClane brought premises liability and general negligence causes of action. McClane claimed that the defendants failed to take proper safety precautions in regard to the stripping and painting project. She contended that Steadfast, as owner of the building, was negligent in the hiring and supervision of Lopez and that Steadfast failed to notify apartment tenants about the painting project. McClane also contended that Lopez failed to tape off, block off, or turn off the HVAC vents in the subject apartment unit, which caused the paint fumes to travel through the vents and into her apartment. She claimed that as a result, she got sick from the exposure to paint fumes. Steadfast contended that it had an indemnity agreement in place with Lopez, which protected it from any injury caused by the project. Thus, it contended that it was not liable for the alleged incident. Lopez claimed that he opened all of the doors and windows in the subject unit and that he did all that was typical and customary to ventilate the area. However, he claimed that McClane opened the door and came into the vacant unit where he was working. He alleged that he suggested to McClane at that time that if the fumes were bothering her, she should not enter the apartment. Lopez claimed that rather than simply staying away so that she wouldn’t smell the fumes, as he suggested, McClane returned to the unit two more times, opened the closed door and entered the unit, demanding that he stop. Lopez further claimed that when McClane returned on the third occasion, she told him that she had her attorney on the phone and then proceeded to take photos of Lopez working. Lopez contended that based on McClane’s conduct and comments at the time, he determined that McClane was attempting to orchestrate circumstances in order to create a claim for a lawsuit., McClane was taken by her daughter to an emergency room, where she presented with symptoms that included shortness of breath, elevated heart rate and nausea. She was then admitted to the hospital, provided oxygen and put under observation for a period of roughly 24 hours. McClane was later discharged the following day. McClane claimed she had fully recovered from her symptoms as of the day she was discharged. Thus, she sought recovery of roughly $17,000 in billed medical costs and further sought recovery of damages for her past pain and suffering. Lopez’s counsel contended the paint fumes were not toxic in any way and could not cause McClane to become seriously sick, let alone require an overnight hospitalization. Thus, counsel asserted that McClane’s hospitalization was due to her pre-existing history of high blood pressure. Counsel further asserted that hospital records documenting McClane’s admission state that McClane failed to take her hypertension medication in the days before the incident.