On Feb. 16, 2013, plaintiff Roni Roberts learned that the previous owner of a foreclosed home in Turlock, which Roberts had purchased a month early, had returned and was trying to enter the property. When Roberts’ employee saw the previous owner at the property, the employee reported it to the Turlock Police Department as a burglary. As a result, Sergeant Dave Shaw of the Turlock Police Department was called to the scene. However, after some investigation, Shaw determined that the previous owner had a right to remove her personal belongings from the property. However, when Roberts arrived at the property, he became angry that the previous owner was allowed to enter the home. Roberts and Shaw then disputed what the prior owner was removing from the property. Ultimately, when Roberts attempted to enter the home, Shaw arrested him. Roberts claimed his wrists were injured during the arrest. Roberts sued Shaw and Shaw’s employers, the city of Turlock and the Turlock Police Department. Roberts alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted false arrest, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of the Bane Act. Roberts claimed that the prior owner was in the home stripping fixtures from the property and that he asked the police to intervene to prevent the theft, but the officers would not stop the conduct. He also claimed that Shaw did not have probable cause to arrest him. In addition, Roberts claimed that Shaw violated his civil rights by improperly applying the handcuffs and by using coercive tactics during the arrest. Shaw claimed Roberts began walking toward the property and making threats to kick out the prior owner. He alleged that he advised Roberts that the prior owner was not committing a crime and was, instead, removing her personal belongings. However, Shaw claimed that Roberts continued to make threats, causing him to be concerned that Roberts might harm the woman removing her belongings. He alleged that as a result, he repeatedly told Roberts not to enter the property and that when Roberts ignored him and continued to try to enter, he arrested Roberts for a violation of Penal Code § 148(a), for resisting, obstructing or delaying an officer in the performance of his duties. Defense counsel contended that Shaw had probable cause to arrest Roberts for a violation of Penal Code § 148(a) and that the use of force in the arrest was reasonable. Thus, defense counsel contended that Roberts’ civil rights were not violated. In response, Roberts claimed that he only started to walk toward the property after the former owner’s vehicle drove away. However, defense counsel argued that neither Roberts nor Shaw were sure whether or not anyone was left behind., Roberts alleged bilateral wrist from the application of the handcuffs. He also claimed that he suffered pain, suffering and damage to his reputation as a result of the unlawful arrest.