I couldn't really tell, but when he said you're going to jail now, did she hit him?
Either way, she had ceased her physical attack on him when he threw the epic upper cut of destruction. Therefore, at that point he was doing nothing more than physically assaulting a female.
However, if she had sustained and continued her initial physical assault on the driver, he had every right to defend himself until the physical threat from her was no longer present.
In the end she attacked him, stopped, and then he attacked her. Making them both wrong in the eyes of California State law (not sure about any where else) and morally wrong in my personal opinion.