Facts

Latiya Pryor is transgender woman. She worked as an in-home healthcare provider for Public Authorities for In-Home Support Services. She filed suit against the City and County of San Francisco, based on an incident that occurred on July 13, 2011.

Plaintiff dismissed the police officers from the case, and the City and County of San Francisco. Several deputy sheriffs, who were sued individually, were dismissed on a motion for partial summary judgment based on the undisputed. The case proceeded to trial against deputy Tequisha Curley only.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Pryor claimed that while leaving a patient's home, she was attacked and arrested by members of the San Francisco Police Department. She claimed she was tackled, slammed to the ground, and handcuffed. Although she showed the officers her employment identification and explained her reasons for being in the neighborhood, the officers took her to jail. The officers searched her, but found no illegal substances.

The officers informed Pryor that they could not put her in an arrest wagon with males or females because she was transgender, and instead marched her through the streets to the police station. She was strip searched at the station, and subjected to anti-transgender comments. The officers also forcefully pulled a hair weave off of her head, causing her substantial physical and emotional pain.

Pryor was then taken to a special holding area for transgender women, before being released the next day. She was not charged with any crimes.

Pryor asserted causes of action for violation of her Fourth Amendment Rights, violation of her Fourteenth Amendment Rights, negligent failure to prevent the deprivation of her rights, assault, battery, false arrest, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of the Ralph Act, violation of the Bane Act, gender violence, and negligent hiring. Pryor also claimed that she was treated with excessive force and discriminated against based on her transgender status when her hairpiece was removed at the San Francisco county jail.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Pryor claimed the hairpiece was firmly affixed with glue to a stocking cap and her natural hair under the cap and that she was injured by removal of the hairpiece. The deputies who processed Pryor into the jail disputed the hairpiece was firmly glued in and testified that the hairpiece was removed pursuant to policy, for reasons of jail security.

Result

The jury unanimous found in favor of deputy Curley, finding that no excessive force was used and that the deputy did not discriminate against Pryor based on her gender identity.

Other Information

Defendant was awarded costs of suit in excess of $17,000, according to the defense. Plaintiff has filed a notice of appeal. FILING DATE: April 23, 2012.