On Dec. 4, 2013, plaintiff Jamarr Isom, 35, a security guard, was driving a gold Lexus on the westbound side of Jefferson Boulevard, near its intersection with Margaret Avenue, in Culver City, when he was pulled over by Police Officers Ulloa and Lee Thornton. While stopped, Isom placed a phone call. After several requests, Isom provided the officers with his driver’s license, but he allegedly refused the officers’ request to hang up the phone. Ulloa then opened Isom’s front, driver’s side door, removed the cell phone from Isom’s left hand, and placed Isom’s left wrist in a wrist lock. On instruction from Ulloa, Isom was ordered to exit the vehicle. However, as he began to exit his vehicle, Isom tried to grab his phone from the roof of the vehicle, where it had been placed by Ulloa. As a result, Ulloa brought Isom to the ground and handcuffed him. Isom sued Ulloa; Thornton; and their employer, the city of Los Angeles Police Department and the city of Los Angeles. Isom alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted violations of his civil rights, including illegal search, unlawful seizure, excessive force, false arrest, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Prior to trial, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim of illegal search, and the claims against the city of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Police Department were dismissed before trial. The matter subsequently proceeded to a bifurcated trial against Ulloa and Thornton. Isom claimed that Ulloa and Thornton unlawfully stopped his vehicle and used excessive force against him. He also claimed that the police officers falsely imprisoned and arrested him. Isom further claimed that Thornton failed to prevent Ulloa from using excessive force during the subject incident and that Thornton unlawfully searched his vehicle and person. Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that Ulloa violated the Bane Act. Defense counsel contended that Ulloa and Thornton had reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop and had probable cause for Isom’s arrest. Specifically, counsel asserted that Isom refused several of the officers’ requests to see copies of Isom’s driver’s license, vehicle’s registration, and proof of insurance. Counsel contended that Isom eventually provided the officers with his driver’s license, but refused to provide them with the other documents. Counsel also contended that Isom placed a phone call while stopped and refused the officers’ request to hang up the phone. Defense counsel asserted that Isom then grabbed an ink pen, which he held in an overhand position, and that the police officers perceived the act as a threat, causing Ulloa to open Isom’s driver’s side door, remove the cell phone, and placed Isom in a wrist lock. Counsel also asserted that when Isom was ordered to exit the vehicle, Isom tried to grab his phone from the roof of the vehicle, and then tensed his arms and upper body, and lowered his center of gravity in a manner that prompted Ulloa to subdue Isom to the ground, where he was handcuffed. The defense’s expert in police procedures opined that, per Penal Code § 148(a), Isom’s attempts to resist arrest necessitated a reasonable use of force in order to execute Isom’s arrest., The trial was bifurcated. Damages were not before the court. Isom claimed that he sustained right-sided neck pain, and soft tissue of his back, and right, dominant arm and shoulder. He also claimed the incident caused him to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Isom subsequently presented to California Hospital Medical Center, in Los Angeles, after his arrest and complained of pain to his right shoulder and one of his knees. The hospital’s staff then approved him for booking, and Isom was discharged to the care of the police officers. Isom ultimately underwent a course of cognitive therapy for his alleged post-traumatic stress disorder. He was also prescribed medication to manage the alleged emotional stress related to the condition. Thus, Isom sought recovery of medical costs and damages for his pain and suffering. He also sought recovery of punitive damages.