This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.


Civil Rights
Excessive Force
Wrongful Death

Erika Canas, Jose Canas, a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, and Jesus Canas, by and through his guardian ad litem v. City of Sunnyvale, Chris Searle, Darren Pang and Does 1-25

Published: Dec. 1, 2012 | Result Date: Sep. 20, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 5:2008-cv-05771 Verdict –  Defense

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Sharmi P. Shah

James K. Roberts

Russell A. Robinson
(Law Office of Russell A. Robinson)


Defendant

Gregory M. Fox
(Bertrand, Fox, Elliot, Osman & Wenzel APC)

Meaghan A. Snyder
(Wilson, Sonsini , Goodrich & Rosati)


Experts

Plaintiff

Roger A. Clark
(technical)

Phillip H. Allman III, Ph.D.
(technical)

Defendant

Alexander Jason
(technical)

Patrick F. Mason Ph.D.
(technical)

Donald S. Cameron
(technical)

Gary T. Moran
(technical)

Facts

Jose Canas, a homicide suspect, was shot and killed by the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety during an attempted warrant supported arrest. Canas was allegedly attempting to flee in his vehicle while Detective Chris Searle was in the path of the vehicle. Searle's partner, Detective Darren Pang, shot and killed Canas.

The decedent's wife, Erika Canas, and his minor sons sued Pearle, Pang, and the city of Sunnyvale. They alleged that Pang violated Canas' Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force when attempting to take him into custody. They also alleged a negligence claim against Pang and Searle, and a state respondeat superior claim against the City. The plaintiffs argued that Searle was not in the path of the vehicle and not in mortal danger at the time of the incident. Thus, they argued that Pang should not have fired his weapon. Instead, they claimed that the officers rushed to arrest Canas while in plain clothes, causing him to panic and attempt to drive way. One witness placed Searle on the sidewalk, and thus not in the path of the vehicle. However, all other witnesses placed Searle in the path of the vehicle.

The defendants asserted qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. Pang claimed that he fired his shot in order to stop Canas from hitting his partner.

Damages

The decedent's family sought recovery of $19,384 in total medical expenses. They also sought recovery of $166,542 for their past income loss, and $1,188,825 for their future economic loss.

Result

The jury found that Pang did not use excessive force in causing Canas' death. It also found that neither Pang nor Searle was negligent.

Deliberation

three hours

Length

two weeks


#115353

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390