On Jan. 21, 2014, plaintiff’s decedent Thomas Smith Jr., a detective sergeant for the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), led a group of detectives and officers in a probation search of a residence in the city of Dublin. The search was part of an investigation of an in-custody suspect who committed a series of armed robberies and burglaries on BART-owned property. The entry team, led by Smith, approached the residence in order to perform a “knock and talk” search. It was determined that the door was unlocked and it was believed that someone was inside. As a result, Smith knocked on the door twice, announced, “Police,” and then proceeded through the door by himself. Detective Michael Maes, allegedly concerned for the safety of Smith, then announced, “Police! Probation search.” The team then made entry into the home to clear it for suspects. Smith traveled left, into a bathroom/laundry area, which was connected to a bedroom. Maes entered second, but did not follow Smith, and moved forward into the residence. Maes, and other personnel, cleared other rooms of the apartment, but were unaware of Smith’s location, as none of the officers verbally communicated with Smith, who entered as the lead for the search. Maes stopped near the entrance of a bedroom, toward the back of the apartment, and was positioned in front of the threshold of the bedroom doorway. He then observed a shadowy figure and a raised gun emerge from the closet. However, Maes was unaware that the person emerging was Smith. Thus, without giving a verbal order or warning, Maes fired a single round from his gun. Smith was subsequently shot. He was later pronounced dead at a hospital. The decedent’s wife, plaintiff Kellie Smith, a former BART police department officer, sued the Bay Area Rapid Transit District; Maes; the Chief of BART Police, Kenton Rainey; and the deputy chief at BART, Benson Fairow. Ms. Smith alleged Maes’ action constituted excessive force and that BART, Rainey and Fairow failed to properly train Maes and Mr. Smith. Plaintiff’s contended that BART failed to provide proper training on building and probation searches to Mr. Smith and other BART detectives. Counsel asserted that BART management was aware of the lack of training because Mr. Smith specifically requested training for his detective unit. Counsel further asserted that Mr. Smith also requested assistance from SWAT and/or other tactical units to aid in conducting searches because those personnel had received extensive training on performing building searches in a safe manner. However, plaintiff’s counsel asserted that Mr. Smith’s requests were repeatedly denied by Fairow. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Maes’ shooting of Mr. Smith was an excessive and unreasonable use of deadly force. Counsel also contended that Maes committed tactical errors during the search, including but not limited to, not announcing his location, failing to turn on the lights, and failing to follow basic room-clearing techniques. Counsel asserted that Maes’ errors led to his unreasonable use of deadly force that was applied without warning or retreat, even though there was ample opportunity to do so. Plaintiff’s counsel also asserted that forensic evidence established that Mr. Smith’s firearm was not pointed at Maes at the time of the fatal shot. In addition, Ms. Smith brought claims under California’s Bane Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1), seeking an injunction to prevent BART from forcing employees to perform tactical operations without having the necessary training. The injunction also sought to force BART to implement changes to training and policies that would promote officer and public safety. Defense counsel asserted that Ms. Smith’s claims were barred by the Fireman’s Rule. Counsel contended that Mr. Smith and all other BART police personnel that were present during the search had at least the necessary and proper training to perform the basic law enforcement activities and thatat least one member of the search team had specialized building-search training. Counsel also presented training records showing that Mr. Smith was offered specialized training on conducting building searches, but that Mr. Smith was unable to attend the training. Defense counsel further contended that Mr. Smith voluntarily took command of the search and changed the scope of the search once the entry team arrived at the apartment. In addition, counsel contended that BART instituted a policy where detectives were only allowed to enter a residence to perform a search if they were able to gain voluntary compliance from the resident. Thus, defense counsel asserted that Mr. Smith chose to enter the apartment and conduct the search despite not having obtained voluntary compliance to enter from the resident., Mr. Smith suffered a gunshot wound to his chest. He was subsequently rushed to Eden Medical Center, in Castro Valley. However, when life-saving attempts failed, he was pronounced dead. Mr. Smith was survived by his wife, plaintiff Kellie Smith, and a minor daughter. Ms. Smith, who was a 20-year veteran of the BART Police Department, sought recovery of wrongful death damages for the loss of her husband.