Brown

Brown v. Ransweiler

Good Law
171 Cal. App. 4th 516·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 200·89 Cal. Rptr. 3d 801
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 2009D051983California8,695 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aaron, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Paula J. Brown, an innocent bystander, was injured by fragments from at least one stray bullet fired by a police officer. At the time shots were fired, law enforcement officers were attempting to apprehend a murder suspect who had just driven up onto the curb at a strip mall, heading in the direction of two police officers. Several officers fired at the suspect, believing that the life of at least one of the officers was in imminent danger. Paula and her son, Jonathan Brown, who was with Paula when she was shot, sued a number of the officers who were on the scene, including respondent El Cajon Police Officer Robert Ransweiler. We conclude that under the undisputed facts presented on summary judgment, Ransweiler’s shooting at the suspect was objectively reasonable as a matter of law, and that he therefore cannot be held liable for the Browns’ injuries.

II.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Factual background

1. The Browns’ experience

On August 5, 2004, Paula and Jonathan were in the lobby of their dentist’s office, which was located in a strip mall in Spring Valley. In addition to the dental office, the strip mall housed a Subway restaurant, a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.