On Sept. 26, 2011, at around 2:30 a.m., plaintiff Krista Martin, 41, a bartender, was a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped by city of Brea police officers Nicholas Petropulos and Christopher Harvey for a driving-under-the-influence investigation of the driver. The confrontation was all captured on video. Martin claimed that the officers used excessive force when they removed her from the vehicle. She landed face first into the dirt, cutting her lip and nose. Martin was then taken into custody, but she was later released and not convicted. Martin sued Petropulos; Harvey; the officers’ employers, the cities of Brea and Yorba Linda. (Brea and Yorba Linda shared a police force at the time of the incident, so both cities were named as defendants.) Martin alleged that the actions of Petropulos and Harvey constituted excessive force and that the cities were vicariously liable for the officers’ actions. Martin claimed that she was not intoxicated at the time of the stop and that she never refused to exit the vehicle. However, she claimed the officers used excessive force in removing her form the vehicle. Defense counsel contended that Martin was intoxicated at the time of the incident and that she continued to make comments to the officers from the passenger side of the vehicle. Counsel contended that when Harvey went to ask Martin to sit quietly, Martin refused and kept making comments. Counsel contended that as a result, Harvey asked Martin to step out of the vehicle, but that Martin again refused. Thus, defense counsel argued that Martin was interfering with the officers’ DUI investigation and that when Martin both verbally and physically resisted the officers, she was taken into custody using minimal and reasonable force. The defense’s expert in police practices opined that the force was reasonable and consistent with the officers’ training., Martin sustained facial lacerations, including cuts to her lip and nose. She also claimed she suffered a rotator cuff of her right, dominant shoulder. She ultimately underwent surgery to repair the rotator cuff tear three years after the incident, which was three weeks before trial. Martin claimed her caused problems with her daily life, her work life, and other activities. She also claimed emotional distress, including psychological issues, due to the police interaction. The plaintiff’s psychology expert agreed that Martin has psychological problems. Thus, Martin sought recovery of approximately $150,000 in past and future medical costs. Defense counsel asserted that Martin had a history of problems with her shoulder and joints, including several years of treatment for similar neck and shoulder problems before the incident. Thus, counsel argued that Martin’s rotator cuff injury was pre-existing and must have been due to cumulative degeneration from her prior issues. The defense’s orthopedic expert opined that there were no caused by the subject incident and that any problems Martin did have were pre-existing and degenerative. In regard to Martin’s alleged psychological issues, defense counsel also argued that they were pre-existing.