On March 15, 2011, plaintiffs Alan and Pamela Stimmell were contacted by agents of the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Firearms, regarding guns the Stimmells’ nephew, Jeremy Wells, turned over to them. Due to a domestic violence restraining order, Wells was required to turn in his guns or sell them to a licensed dealer. However, instead, he gave them to his uncle and aunt. Upon the agents learning this, they spoke with Mrs. Stimmell, and she confirmed that she and Mr. Stimmell had Wells’ guns. The agents then arrived to perform a sweep of the Stimmell home in Clovis to recover firearms registered to persons prohibited from possessing firearms under California law. However, Mr. Stimmell refused to turn over Wells’ guns or consent to a search for the firearms, telling the agents to return the next day. When the agents insisted that they had to collect the guns immediately, Mr. Stimmell told them to get a warrant. He then tried to cut off the investigation by turning away and walking briskly toward his garage, but the agents detained him and conducted a protective sweep of the home. Two of the agents then left to obtain a search warrant, but based on the time of day and availability of judges, it took the agents four hours to return with the warrant, which they provided to Mr. Stimmell and his two attorneys. The agents were initially looking for two guns in the Stimmell home, but their search ultimately yielded five handguns, six rifles and 600 rounds of ammunition belonging to Wells. Mr. and Mrs. Stimmell sued the three if the agents involved in the incident, Juan Morales, Frank Navarro and Luke Powell. The Stimmells alleged that the agents conducted an improper search and seizure, in violation of their Fourth Amendment civil rights. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended the agents violated the Stimmells’ civil rights by detaining Mr. Stimmell and searching the Stimmell home without his approval. Counsel also contended that Mrs. Stimmell was unconstitutionally seized when she arrived at her home and the agents told her that if she entered the house, she would have to remain until the search warrant was executed. Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that the search warrant was overly broad and that it was obtained through misleading statements and material omissions. Thus, counsel argued that the agents lacked probable cause. Agents Morales, Navarro and Powell claimed that they detained Mr. Stimmell and conducted a protective sweep of the home based on safety concerns. Thus, defense counsel argued that all of the agents’ actions were reasonable and did not violate any of the Stimmells’ Fourth Amendment rights., Mr. and Mrs. Stimmell claimed they suffered emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation as a result of the agents’ actions. Thus, they sought recovery of general damages for their emotional distress as well as for the invasion of their privacy, and the violation of the safety and security of their residence.