On Dec. 18, 2010, plaintiffs’ decedent, Jose Lucero, a recent parolee with a history of assaultive behavior against law enforcement and family members, called 911 claiming a woman in Lancaster was being assaulted. In response to the call, deputies form the Kern County Sheriff’s Department, Ryan Greer and Daniel Willis, arrived at the home of plaintiffs Florencio and Lilia Lucero in Rosamond at approximately 4:50 p.m. However, when Jose Lucero failed to provide information about the alleged assault, the deputies exited the home, but remained on the property to speak with Jose Lucero’s brother, Esteban Lucero, outside of the house. During their conversation, Esteban Lucero told the officers that his brother had not been in the right state of mind ever since a fight he was involved in at prison. The deputies then went back inside the house, along with Deputies Angelo Gonzalez and Jonathan Juden, and a physical altercation ensued between the deputies and Jose Lucero. As a result, Jose Lucero was handcuffed and placed under arrest. However, while Jose Lucero was handcuffed, he went into cardiac arrest and was pronounced dead on arrival at Antelope Valley Medical Center in Lancaster. Florencio and Lilia Lucero, acting individually and on behalf of the estate of Jose Lucero, sued Greer, Willis, Gonzalez and Juden, as well as the deputies’ employers, the county of Kern and the Kern County Sheriff’s Department. Florencio and Lilia Lucero alleged that the deputies’ actions constituted assault, battery, and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, making them liable for their son’s wrongful death. They also alleged that the deputies’ actions against Jose Lucero were a violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and that the county and sheriff’s department were negligent in the hiring and supervision of the deputies. As a result of defense counsel’s motion for nonsuit, only two causes of action were submitted to the jury: negligent causation of wrongful death and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Furthermore, the plaintiffs waived economic damages, and the claim for punitive damages was not allowed to go to jury. Florencio and Lilia Lucero claimed that after talking to Esteban Lucero outside for roughly 10 minutes, the deputies went back inside the house when Jose Lucero continued to call 911 and yell at the deputies. They claimed the deputies then threatened to arrest Jose Lucero for making the 911 calls, causing their son to hide behind them. Florencio and Lilia Lucero further claimed that at some point, Jose Lucero threw an “Aim ‘n Flame” lighter at the deputies, prompting the deputies to fire their TASER devices at him. In addition, they claimed that the deputies recycled their TASER devices collectively 29 times, while concurrently striking the decedent repeatedly with batons and fists, as well as deploying pepper spray. The parents further claimed that the beating lasted approximately six minutes. Plaintiffs’ counsel presented two witnesses that were inside the home, Esteban Lucero and neighbor Harold Smizer, who testified that that the decedent was on the ground in a fetal position while being repeatedly struck by the deputies. Deputies Willis and Greer contended that while they were talking to Esteban Lucero and were about to leave, the decedent exited the house, grabbed both of his parents, and dragged his mother back into the home. They claimed that, knowing the decedent’s history of assault, the felt that the decedent needed to be taken into custody since he appeared to be placing his family members in danger. Willis and Greer claimed that as a result, they were joined by Deputy Gonzalez as they went inside the residence, and that they were later joined by Deputy Juden. The deputies claimed that once they back inside the house, they realized the decedent was on drugs, since he was hyper, sweating profusely and not acting reasonably, and that their belief was substantiated by the autopsy blood tests. They also claimed that the decedent threatened to shoot them and that while he appeared to be unarmed, he had not been searched. The deputies further claimed that the decedent tried to use both his mother and father as human shields, and that while holding his father, the decedent began to throw household items at the deputies. They alleged that after extricating the father from the decedent’s chokehold, they attempted to take the decedent into custody, but that he resisted. The deputies claimed that as a result, the decedent was shot five times by TASER probes, but that only three or four actually placed the decedent “under load.” They claimed that while the decedent continued to resist, he was struck with a baton in the lower extremities approximately 33 times and pepper sprayed twice. Defense counsel argued that the deputies’ actions during their attempt to restrain the decedent were due to the decedent’s high dosage of methamphetamine, which made him violent and impervious to pain. Counsel contended that a person under the influence of methamphetamine, such as the decedent, would not have been able to lay still in a fetal position for the approximate five-minute duration of the incident, as alleged by the plaintiffs. Defense counsel also contended that one deputy had his hand broken by the decedent during the ordeal, while other deputies sustained cuts and abrasions. However, plaintiffs’ counsel responded that the officer who broke his hand also broke his baton, and that it was likely caused by him beating the decedent. The police practice experts for both the plaintiffs and the defense testified that the deputies had the right to enter the house and had a duty to arrest the decedent while using appropriate force. However, the experts disagreed on the reasonableness of the force used based upon the different versions of the facts as presented by the two parties., Jose Lucero went into cardiac arrest and was pronounced dead upon arrival at Antelope Valley Medical Center in Lancaster. The Kern County coroner identified the death as a “homicide due to cardiac arrest secondary to methamphetamine intoxication and police restraint.” The decedent’s parents, Florencio and Lilia Lucero, sought recovery of past and future wrongful death damages for the loss of their son’s love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society and moral support. They also claimed that they each suffered emotional distress as a result of the incident and their son’s death. Thus, they sought recovery of damages for their own past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel argued that Jose Lucero’s death was never ruled a homicide, and that the county conducted an investigation that determined the death was not a homicide. Counsel contended that the county’s own investigation determined that the decedent died as a result of methamphetamine intoxication and cardiac arrest as a result of excited delirium.