On March 9, 2010, plaintiff Jan Veis, 55, a bookkeeper, was walking on the sidewalk of Penfield Avenue in Northridge. While walking near the intersection of Gresham Street, Veis tripped and fell over an uplifted part of the sidewalk, landing on a parkway grass strip. Veis claimed an injury to her left arm. Veis sued the city of Los Angeles. She alleged that the city failed to properly repair and/or maintain the sidewalk, creating a dangerous condition. Veis claimed that the area of the sidewalk in question had two uplifts; the first was raised by 1.5 inches where she tripped due to a section of concrete that had broken loose and sunk on an angle and the other uplift was three-quarters of an inch nearby. Veis claimed that the city removed the visual cue of the sidewalk uplifts by removing a tree in the area, and not repairing the uplifts or painting them. She further claimed that the city had taken photographs of the two uplifts and sidewalk cracks three years before the accident, which had become worse by the time of the accident. The city contended that the defect was trivial and not a dangerous condition. It contended that while trivial, the uplift was an open and obvious condition that presented no substantial risk of harm when used with reasonable care. The city further contended that its inspection system had no complaints of the sidewalk area in question in 10 years prior to the incident., Veis was taken by her daughter to an emergency room after the accident. She sustained a fracture of her left humerus, for which she underwent open reduction and internal fixation with the insertion of a plate and screws within one day of the injury. She then followed up with three months of recovery, followed by three months of physical therapy. Veis claimed she is now 95 percent healed from her injury, with only some intermittent pain. She missed three months of work during her recovery and subsequently claimed $14,000 in lost earnings. Veis further claimed $68,000 in past medical costs and sought recovery of $300,000 in total damages, including an undisclosed amount for her pain and suffering. Defense counsel did not dispute the severity of Veis’ injury, and stipulated to her claimed medical bills and lost wages.