One night in December 2011, plaintiff Kong Meng Xiong, 21, and plaintiff Luh Xiong, 20, (unrelated) were at a party in Merced when police officers from the city of Merced showed up. The Merced police officers were responding to a call of a man brandishing a gun at a party. Upon arriving at the scene, the officers approached the subject address under concealment and took a position of observation while waiting for back-up units to arrive. During that time, the officers allegedly heard the “racking” sound of a semi-automatic weapon being loaded from the vicinity of the subject house, as well as verbal challenges by an unknown number of male subjects gathered in the backyard of the property. Seconds later, the officers observed Kong Xiong emerge from the side gate, heading down a pathway directly toward them. Kong Xiong’s right hand was concealed in the fold of his jacket, leaving only his left hand visible. The officers confronted Kong Xiong by illuminating him with flashlights mounted to their service weapons and yelled to put his hands up. Kong Xiong was ultimately shot in the left calf by Police Officers Eduardo Chavez and James Lodwick. A video recording of the incident was obtained from one of the officers who had recorded the incident via an eye-glasses camera that the officer had purchased on his own. Kong Xiong sued Chavez; Lodwick; Sergeant Court; Detective Deliman; and the officers’ employers, the city of Merced and the Merced Police Department. Kong Xiong alleged that the actions of Officers Chavez and Lodwick constituted excessive force and that the remaining defendants were liable for the officers’ actions. Luh Xiong brought a separate bystander action against Chavez, Lodwick, and the city of Merced. The matters were ultimately consolidated. However, prior to trial, defense counsel was granted summary judgment, dismissing the Merced Police Department and the city from the case. Summary adjudication was also obtained against Luh Xiong, as the court ruled that Luh Xiong did not have a cognizable Fourth Amendment claim because he was not the deliberate object of the officers’ use of force. The defendants then agreed to settle Luh Xiong’s remaining Fourteenth Amendment claim and negligence claim for $45,000 one week before trial. Thus, the matter proceeded to trial on Kong Xiong’s claims against Chavez and Lodwick only. At trial, Kong Xiong claimed that he never pulled a gun from his waist and that he was simply running away. Thus, he contended that the officers were never in immediate danger when they fired their weapons. Kong Xiong further contended that the video appeared to show him unarmed and fleeing, thus proving that he was “unarmed” by the fact that the video could not definitively show a gun in his hand, as the officers alleged. Chavez and Lodwick claimed that they saw Kong Xiong’s right hand concealed in the fold of his jacket, leaving only his left hand visible, so they confronted him by illuminating him with flashlights mounted to their service weapons and yelling to put his hands up. However, they testified that they did not have time to say “police.” Chavez and Lodwick claimed that after Kong Xiong was illuminated, he pulled a gun as he turned back toward them and pointed the gun in their direction. They claimed that as a result, they fired upon Kong Xiong as he turned and then continued to fire as Kong Xiong ran back toward the gate. They further claimed that they stopped firing when Kong Xiong was struck in the back of the calf and fell. In addition, Chavez and Lodwick claimed that when they approached to secure Kong Xiong, a gun was found next to him. Defense counsel noted that the video recording from the eye-glasses camera was of poor quality and hampered further by the low-light conditions. Through the testimony of the defense’s video forensics expert, defense counsel argued that the video evidence was, at best, inconclusive and not representative of what the officers perceived in the ambient light at the time of the incident., Kong Xiong sustained a gunshot wound to the left calf. He was subsequently taken to a hospital, where he was treated and later released to the custody of the Merced Police Department. Kong Xiong then continued treatment for his injury. Kong Xiong claimed that he ultimately recovered from his injury, but that he continues to have soreness in his left leg. He also claimed that his gait had changed due to limping. Thus, Kong Xiong sought recovery of his medical costs and of damages for his pain and suffering.