Appeals

Defendant San Francisco filed a Petition for Certiorari regarding the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the trial court’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s civil rights claims. The Supreme Court denied the Petition for Certiorari. After this case was returned to the trial court, Defendant San Francisco moved for partial summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed Plaintiff’s entire action. Please see the Petition for Certiorari. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit)

Plaintiff was arrested by the San Francisco Police Department in 2000. Plaintiff timely submitted a government tort claim, which Defendant San Francisco rejected. Plaintiff filed a federal court diversity action in 2002 on behalf of his father, an Ohio resident, claiming that upon learning of his son’s arrest, the father “became distressed, which led to a heart attack” and his eventual death. The United States District Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint as untimely. The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s dismissal. Please see the Appellate Decision. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California)

Plaintiff was arrested by the San Francisco Police Department for selling crack cocaine in the Tenderloin. Plaintiff claimed that members of the San Francisco Police Department conducted an illegal body cavity search by removing packages of crack cocaine from Plaintiff’s vagina. Plaintiff plead guilty to possession of crack cocaine. Plaintiff then filed a lawsuit claiming violation of her civil rights, specifically Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches. Defendant San Francisco moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s civil rights claims under the Heck doctrine, which bars civil rights claims that call into question a plaintiff’s criminal conviction unless plaintiff first proves that the criminal conviction has been overturned. The trial court granted Defendant San Francisco’s motion to dismiss. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court finding that the Heck doctrine was not applicable because Plaintiff’s conviction was based on a guilty plea. This case went to trial after we left the City Attorney’s Office, and our colleague Deputy City Attorney Scott D. Weiner obtained a defense verdict. Please see the Appellate Decision. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California)

Plaintiff claimed that he was subjected to excessive force by sheriff’s deputies while Plaintiff was in the San Francisco County Jail. The trial court granted Defendant San Francisco’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s civil rights claims because “sheriffs in California are state actors and therefore immune from liability under the Eleventh Amendment.” The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court because during the pendency of the appeal, the Ninth Circuit decided another case in which it determined that “the sheriff acts for the county, not the state.” Please see the Appellate Decision. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California)

The beneficiaries appealed from the Judgment entered in favor of our clients John Tom and Sandy Tom. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court Judgment in favor of the Toms. Please see the Appellate Decision. (San Francisco Superior Court)

Plaintiff was beaten up in the San Francisco County Jail by fellow inmates. Plaintiff appealed from the defense verdict in favor of the Defendant Sheriff’s Deputies, contending inconsistent jury findings rendered it improper to enter a judgment in favor of defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment.

At the time of Defendant’s arrest, the San Francisco Police Department seized $49,542 from Defendant. Defendant appealed the trial court’s order granting a motion by Defendant San Francisco, on behalf of the People of the State of California, for reimbursement of $20,381.79 for legal services rendered to Defendant during multiple criminal prosecutions. Defendant claims that proper notice of the potential for reimbursement for legal services was not given during criminal proceedings. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court order. Please see the Appellate Decision. (San Francisco Superior Court)

We defended Defendant Candlelite Inn from Plaintiff’s claim arising out of an assault on the motel’s premises. A fellow guest assaulted Plaintiff. The trial court granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment that the motel had no duty to protect Plaintiff because there had been no prior similar assaults. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court’s ruling. Please see the Appellate Decision. (Santa Cruz Superior Court)