In this action, plaintiff alleged that defendant deputies and the County violated his civil rights when the deputies allegedly used excessive force in detaining him and in attempting to cover up their alleged misconduct. At trial, defendants contended that the use of force was reasonable in light of plaintiff’s actions. In addition, defendants argued that plaintiff had no evidence that defendants conspired to hide their use of force. After deliberating, the jury returned a unanimous decision in favor of all the defendants, finding that they acted properly in detaining the plaintiff.
In this matter, plaintiff alleged that, while incarcerated, defendants deputies, Sheriff’s Department, County, and Sheriff, engaged in actions amounting to the use of excessive force, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligence. In addition, plaintiff asserted claims for negligent supervision and unconstitutional policies, practice, and procedures. We successfully argued a motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ Monell, negligent supervision, and general negligence claims. At trial, we argued that the evidence supported defendants’ contention that the force used was justified and reasonable. In addition to obtaining a defense verdict, our application to tax costs was granted.
Plaintiff alleged that the local law enforcement agency did not provide sufficient security at a public venue when he was assaulted by a third-party. In a letter, we advised plaintiff’s counsel that our clients, public entities defendants, had absolute immunity pursuant to Government Code § 845, and that our clients had not breached any duty or care owed to the plaintiff. Soon thereafter, plaintiff filed a dismissal.