At around 8 p.m. on Nov. 21, 2014, plaintiff James Smith, a mentally disabled 18 year old, was with some neighbors outside his home, in Stockton, when he became engaged in horseplay with a male neighbor who was almost his age and size, while family and friends were egging them on. James’ 16-year-old sister, a mentally disabled plaintiff, was also present. When Stockton Police Officer Houston Sensabaugh pulled up, James and his neighbor stopped what they were doing. However, when the officer exited his vehicle, James became afraid and began walking toward his home. Sensabaugh subsequently told James to stop, but James kept walking. As a result, Sensabaugh tackled James, placed him in stress positions, and handcuffed him. When other officers arrived, Sensabaugh sicced a police dog on James. As a result, James allegedly sustained multiple . James was arrested, and charged with resisting and delaying an officer. Sensabaugh made a report stating that James and the neighbor were fighting and that someone flagged the officer down to ask him to intervene. Sensabaugh and other officers also stated that James was struggling with them and that the use of the police dog was necessary. However, the charges against James were dropped after a judge ruled that James did not have the requisite mental capacity. James and his sister sued Sensabaugh; some of the other officers at the scene, Travis Weber, T. Rees, Benjamin Ratzlaff and Kenny Hoang Minh Pham; the officers’ supervisor, the chief of the Stockton Police Department, Eric Jones; and the officers’ employer, the city of Stockton. James alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted a violation of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure; his right to be free from excessive force under the Fourth amendment and the Bane Act; and his civil rights under 42 USC § 1983. James also alleged that the defendants’ actions constituted malicious prosecution. Plaintiffs’ counsel stated that James was diagnosed with an intellectual disability at an early age and that James has the mind of a 4 or 5 year old. Counsel also contended that anyone who interacts with James, even briefly, can tell that he is mentally handicapped. Thus, plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the statements given by Sensabaugh and the other officers were false. James, his mother, and other witnesses maintained that the boys were playing, that there was no hostility between them, and that no one called the police or flagged them down. Plaintiffs’ counsel also noted that Sensabaugh did not identify or describe the person who allegedly flagged him down. In addition, counsel contended that Sensabaugh had no reasonable suspicion that any crime had been committed and no legal right to detain James, who was within his rights to walk away. Plaintiffs’ counsel presented cell-phone video of the dog attack, which allegedly showed the crowd pleading with the police to stop it and various people crying out, “He’s disabled!” at least 15 times in a 53-second period. Although badly lit, the video allegedly appears to show the dog ripping at James from different directions, and does not show James flailing his arms or otherwise resist. Plaintiffs’ counsel also noted that two officers on the video appear to stand over James casually, letting the dog bite him and not taking physical custody of him. Multiple witnesses claimed that James was already handcuffed and face-down when the dog was released from a police car. They also claimed that the dog first attacked an older female neighbor of James’, but that Sensabaugh took the dog off of her and sicced it on James. The witnesses also claimed that, while the dog was attacking James, he was telling the officers, “I didn’t do anything wrong.” In addition, the witnesses claimed that the dog ripped James’ clothes and that although James was fully clothed at first, he was in nothing but a shredded pair of boxers by the time Sensabaugh called the dog off him. Plaintiffs’ counsel further contended that Sensabaugh had a long history of using excessive force and that at town hall meetings, a city councilman openly called for Sensabaugh to be fired. Counsel also contended that Sensabaugh lied when he said that James’ shirt was already off when the officer arrived, as it was about 50 degrees out and, therefore, James would not have been shirtless. Defense counsel denied the plaintiffs’ allegations and contended that the officers’ statements about the incident were true., James sustained numerous bite wounds, which allegedly left scars on his wrist, arm, shoulder, torso, upper thigh, and back of the knee. When he was slammed to the ground, about a third of one front tooth broke off and the other front tooth was damaged. James was subsequently taken to an emergency room before being brought to jail, where he spent his entire five-day incarceration in the infirmary. His Medi-Cal lien was $600. James claimed that he suffers from severe emotional trauma as a result of the incident and that he now shakes, is nervous, and runs away when he sees police. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that James’ home is on a street where police frequently drive by or stop and that this regular exposure has increased, rather than lessened, James’ fear. Specifically, James claimed that one time, when police shined a spotlight on him, he literally ran out of his slippers, leaving them in the middle of the street. James’ sister, who is autistic, claimed that she suffers from severe emotional distress as a result of seeing her brother injured. Specifically, she claimed that she has nightmares and is fixated on the event.