On Sept. 12, 2007, at approximately 11:25 a.m., plaintiffs’ decedent Jose Francisco Canas, a homicide suspect, was shot and killed by the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety during an attempted warrant-supported arrest in Sunnyvale. Canas was allegedly attempting to flee in his vehicle while Detective Chris Searle was in the path of his vehicle. As a result, Searle’s partner, Detective Darren Pang, shot and killed Canas. The decedent’s wife, Erika Canas, and his minor sons, Jose and Jesus Canas, sued Searle, Pang and their employer, the city of Sunnyvale, for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They alleged that Pang violated Mr. Canas’ Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force when attempting to take him into custody. They also alleged a state negligence claim against Pang and Searle, and a state respondeat superior claim against the city. Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that Searle was not in the path of Mr. Canas’ vehicle and was not in mortal danger at the time of the incident. Thus, counsel argued that Pang should not have fired his weapon. Instead, plaintiffs’ counsel contended the officers rushed in to arrest Mr. Canas in plain clothes, causing him to panic and attempt to drive away. One witness’ testimony placed Searle on the sidewalk, not on the street near Mr. Canas’ vehicle, but all other percipient witness testimony placed Searle in the street near Mr. Canas’ vehicle. The defendants asserted qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. Searle claimed that he fired one controlled shot at Mr. Canas’ vehicle after it left from the curb, but that the gunshot made contact with the back of Mr. Canas’ seat and did not strike him. He claimed that he fired his shot in order to protect third parties from the danger likely to be caused by a high-risk warrant suspect fleeing from the police. Pang claimed that when Searle’s shot missed, he fired one controlled shot in order to stop Mr. Canas from hitting his partner., Mr. Canas suffered a gunshot wound and died. He was survived by his wife and two 6-year-old sons. The decedent’s family sought recovery of $19,383.80 in total medical expenses paid on Mr. Canas’ behalf after he was shot. They also sought recovery of damages in the amount of $166,542 for their past income loss and loss of household services, and damages in the amount of $1,188,825 for the present discounted value of their future economic loss and loss of household services. Finally, the decedent’s family sought recovery of unspecified non-economic damages for the loss of the decedent’s love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society and moral support, and for the loss of the decedent’s training and guidance.