Facts

In 2004, Jose Gomez entered a restaurant with a mask over his face, and appeared to be holding a gun (which was actually a replica). Gomez jumped over the counter and attempted to rob the cash registers. Gomez struggled with a restaurant employee's family member and at least one other employee, while emergency vehicles were dispatched. When police arrived at the scene, Gomez reportedly failed to comply with their orders, and was eventually shot and killed by defendant Officer David Maitlen.

In 2007, Gomez's parents sued the city of Torrance, the Torrance Police Department and Maitlen for excessive force and wrongful death. The court granted the city's motion for summary judgment, determining the suit was barred by the statute of limitations. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's order granting summary judgment and remanded the case back to the district court for further proceedings. The Court of Appeal also held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to grant Gomez's motion to continue discovery under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 56(f) because there was no evidence that the Gomezs failed to diligently pursue discovery.

Following remand, the case proceeded to trial. The defense requested the trial be bifurcated between liability and the statute of limitations/fraudulent concealment. The district court granted the motion. In phase one of the bifurcated trial, the district court excluded the Gomezs' "intent" evidence on fraudulent concealment and only allowed evidence concerning the information the police gave to the Gomezs and that they relied upon in deciding not to file a lawsuit within the two-year statute of limitations.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Gomez's parents contended that the city fraudulently concealed information in order to dissuade them from filing suit within the statute of limitations. They also alleged that the police report of the incident misrepresented material. An expert for the Gomezs testified that the police had not complied with police standards and practices when they failed to interview one of the witnesses at the scene.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defense contended that the police report provided was accurate, containing a summarized version of the incident. They further contended that they did nothing to prevent Gomez's parents from filing suit within the statutory period. The defendants claimed that the alleged witness not interviewed was in the restaurant drive-thru at the time of the incident and had not actually witnessed it.

Damages

Gomez's parents sought wrongful death damages for loss of society.

Injuries

Gomez died as a result of the shooting.

Result

Following phase one of the bifurcated trial, the jury rendered a verdict for the defense on the statute of limitations/fraudulent concealment, finding that there was no intent to conceal information from the Gomezs. Based on the jury's verdict, the Gomezs' wrongful death action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. A post-trial motion for a new trial and an appeal are pending.

Deliberation

one hour

Length

three days