What is the difference between admissibility and the sufficiency of the proof of past medical expenses?

The majority also conflates the admissibility of the evidence with the sufficiency of the evidence. (See Bermudez, supra, 237 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1331-1337 [thorough discussion of the difference between the admissibility and the sufficiency of the proof of past medical expenses].) The majority says defendant did not object to the doctors' testimony from billing summaries about amounts billed, which has nothing to do with the sufficiency of the evidence of amounts plaintiff incurred. (See People v. Butler (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1119, 1126 [no objection below is necessary to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence].)