On March 29, 2015, plaintiff’s decedent John Cornejo, 20, an unemployed construction worker, was driving with three other individuals near San Pablo Avenue and Brush Street, in Oakland, when he was pulled over by California Highway Patrol officers Michael Diehl and Zachary Trzesniewski for driving without his headlights on. Officers Cosimo Bruno and David Hazelwood Jr. then arrived as backup. The officers told Cornejo to exit the vehicle. As Cornejo walked to the curb, he quickly put something in his mouth. Diehl told Cornejo to spit out whatever he had just put in his mouth, and the officers repeatedly asked Cornejo if he swallowed drugs. Cornejo told the officers that he had just swallowed gum. The CHP officers took Cornejo to the North County jail, where the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office took custody of Cornejo at 5:45 a.m. Cornejo began to show signs and symptoms of drug use approximately one hour later, and at approximately 8:20 a.m., he was found lying on the floor of his cell with saliva foaming from his mouth after having suffered a seizure. Cornejo was then transported to Highland Hospital, in Oakland, where he died a short time later from a toxic level of methamphetamine in his blood. The decedent’s mother, Yolanda Frausto, acting individually and as the successor in interest to her son’s estate, initially filed a federal suit against Diehl; Trzesniewski; Bruno; Hazelwood; and two other officers, Henry Shultz Jr. and James Koven. She also sued the officers’ employer, the California Highway Patrol, and the decedent’s father, Norman Cornejo, was named as a nominal defendant. Norman Cornejo filed a separate federal suit against the California Highway Patrol, the County of Alameda, and an Alameda County Sheriff’s Department’s deputy who took over custody of the decedent at the jail. The lawsuits included negligence and wrongful death claims, along with federal claims of civil rights violations. However, the claims involving the county defendants settled prior to trial. After the federal court cases were filed, defense counsel moved to dismiss the state court claims of negligence and wrongful death. The federal court granted the defense’s motion for summary judgment, and dismissed the civil rights claims. Plaintiffs’ counsel then filed new cases in Alameda County Superior Court that addressed the state law claims of negligence and violations of the Bane Act. The decedent’s father was later made a plaintiff, acting individually, in Frausto’s suit, and Shultz and Koven were let out of the case. The case caption was then amended, and the two state court cases were consolidated. The state court then dismissed the Bane Act claim, and the estate was dismissed from the lawsuit. Thus, the matter continued with the decedent’s parents’ individual claims against Diehl, Trzesniewski, Bruno, Hazelwood and the California Highway Patrol. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the officers at the scene were aware that John Cornejo had swallowed a bag of drugs after he was pulled over. Counsel pointed to the probable cause declaration, where Bruno wrote that Cornejo had appeared to put a plastic bag in his mouth and chew it rapidly. The document also stated that Cornejo was told to spit out the bag, but that he refused. Counsel also noted that in his report on the incident, Diehl wrote that Cornejo had appeared to swallow a controlled substance. In addition, plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the officers had located drug paraphernalia — specifically a methamphetamine pipe — in Cornejo’s vehicle and that there was no evidence of gum or a gum wrapper at the scene. Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that, based on the evidence found at the scene, the officers should have realized that Cornejo did not swallow gum, as he claimed. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that California Highway Patrol has a policy to arrange a medical examination for an arrestee when he appears to be in need of medical attention, regardless of outward symptoms of illness or injury. Counsel argued that once the officers saw Cornejo swallow something and suspected that the substance was drugs, they should have immediately taken him to a hospital. Counsel contended that experts on both sides agreed that if the CHP officers had done that, Cornejo would have survived. Instead, according to plaintiffs’ counsel, the officers told Cornejo that they would only take him to a hospital if he admitted to swallowing drugs and that after Cornejo told the officers he had only swallowed gum, they took him to jail. Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that once at the jail, the CHP officers failed to tell the deputies at the jail that Cornejo had ingested meth. A sheriff’s deputy testified that if he had known that Cornejo had possibly swallowed meth, he would have summoned a nurse immediately. Trzesniewski testified that he was focused on the other occupants in the vehicle during the arrest, so he was not in a position to see if Cornejo had put anything in his mouth. As a result, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Trzesniewski from the case. The CHP officers claimed that after Cornejo was seen putting something in his mouth and chewing, they appropriately asked him if he had swallowed drugs. They claimed that there was no intent to coerce a confession of drug possession and that they had no intent to charge Cornejo with drug possession. They alleged that they asked Cornejo if he took drugs so that they could determine if, and what type of, medical attention was necessary, including transportation to an emergency room, but that Cornejo denied swallowing drugs and showed no physical symptoms of drug use, which is why they did not arrange for a medical examination. They also insisted that no officer ever knew that Cornejo had ingested meth and that, therefore, they could not have passed along such information. Defense counsel argued that Bruno had only been on the job for a few days at the time of the incident and that Bruno erred in his probable cause declaration when he wrote that the officers observed Cornejo put a plastic bag in his mouth. Counsel also noted that no plastic bag was recovered during the autopsy or in Cornejo’s jail cell. Defense counsel further argued that while Bruno suspected that Cornejo ingested an unknown controlled substance, Hazelwood and Diehl thought Cornejo could have been telling the truth when he said it was gum. Hazelwood claimed that he had experience with suspects who possessed drug paraphernalia, but no drugs, and that he also had experience with suspects who quickly chew gum, thinking that it could mask signs of alcohol on their breath. Defense counsel admitted that when the officers searched the car at the scene, they found drug paraphernalia, including a methamphetamine pipe, but contended that there were no signs of recent drug use based on smells coming from the car or Cornejo’s physical appearance. Counsel also contended that Cornejo complained of shoulder pain at the arrest scene, but that when Bruno and Hazelwood began to take Cornejo to Valley Care Hospital, in Pleasanton, to get medically cleared before taking him to jail, in accordance to CHP policy, Cornejo told them that his shoulder did not hurt and that he did not need medical attention. Counsel further contended that rather than punishing Cornejo by taking him to a jail far from home, the officers took him to the jail in Oakland, where he could be observed by a registered nurse who had an on-call doctor available for consultation. Defense counsel argued that taking every arrestee who swallowed an unknown amount of an unknown controlled substance to the hospital would fill emergency rooms with people who may not be in need of emergency services, while also taking law enforcement officers off the street while they watched over the arrestees. Counsel also argued that there was no evidence that Cornejo would have consented to any medical treatment at the hospital, since he did not show physical symptoms. In addition, the defense called an emergency room doctor at Highland Hospital as an expert witness. He testified that, in his experience, suspects never change their story when denying drug use, even in a private hospital setting outside of the view of law enforcement officers. The expert further testified that even if Cornejo had been taken to the hospital, no doctor would have been able to treat him until he began showing signs of a seizure at 8:20 a.m. Defense counsel contended that while Cornejo was in CHP’s custody between 4:00 a.m. and 5:45 a.m., Cornejo never showed physical signs or symptoms of drug use. Counsel also contended that before being taken into custody at the jail, Cornejo was asked a series of questions, including whether he took drugs, but that Cornejo again denied taking drugs. Counsel further contended that Hazelwood told the jail deputy that Cornejo had put something in his mouth, but that Cornejo again told the deputy that it was only gum. Defense counsel noted that the jail had a registered nurse on staff to observe Cornejo for possible symptoms and that Cornejo was regularly monitored at the jail by a sheriff’s deputy whom he knew from previous visits. The deputy supposedly asked Cornejo several times if he swallowed drugs and that, according to defense counsel, Cornejo continually said no. Counsel also contended that when Cornejo started showing symptoms of drug use at around 6:45 a.m., he denied ingesting drugs during the arrest and, instead, stated that he had used cocaine earlier in the evening. Defense counsel argued that Cornejo was responsible for his death because he was the only person who knew what drug he took and how much he took. Counsel also argued that Cornejo made the conscious decision to lie to the officers and deny medical attention, even when talking to a deputy with whom he was acquainted., John Cornejo collapsed in his holding cell approximately three hours after arriving at the jail. He was found lying on the floor of his cell with saliva foaming from his mouth after having suffered a seizure. Cornejo was then transported by ambulance to Highland Hospital, where doctors attempted to save him. However, Cornejo never regained consciousness and ultimately died hours later from the meth overdose (acute methamphetamine toxicity). The decedent’s mother, Frausto, was living with her son at the time of his death. She sought recovery of economic damages for her past and future loss of household services, loss of financial support, and loss of gifts or benefits. Frausto and the decedent’s father, Norman Cornejo, also sought recovery of past and future noneconomic damages. Defense counsel did not call an economist to dispute the numbers presented by plaintiffs’ counsel. However, during cross-examination of the plaintiffs’ expert economist, defense counsel argued that there was no way to know for sure how much money the decedent would have given his mother in financial support, gifts or benefits in the future.