This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Civil Rights
Excessive Force
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights

Erik Taylor v. Los Angeles County Sheriffs Deputy Lumus , Los Angeles County Sheriffs Deputy Rincon, et al.

Published: Aug. 1, 2015 | Result Date: Jul. 1, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:11-cv-09614-FMO-SS Verdict –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Kenneth K. Lee

Alexander M. Smith
(Jenner & Block LLP)

Jeffrey Atteberry
(Jenner & Block LLP)


Defendant

Ashlee Clark

Andrew C. Pongracz
(Seki, Nishimura & Watase LLP)


Facts

Plaintiff Erik Taylor filed a suit against Los Angeles County Sheriffs Deputies Victor Lemus and Joaquin Rincon, claiming excessive force and malicious prosecution following his arrest.

The criminal case was dismissed in the interest of justice following inaccurate testimony by one of the arresting deputies at the preliminary hearing and follow-up by the Public Defender's office.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that the deputies attacked him when plaintiff called their mother a derogatory remark. He claimed that the deputies planted drugs, a scale, a handgun and ammunition in his apartment in order to cover up their use of excessive force against him. He claimed that the criminal charges against him were procured by fraud, perjury, manufactured evidence and other actions amounting to bad faith.

Plaintiff alleged violation of his fourth and fourteenth amendment rights and brought two claims against the individual deputies for excessive force and malicious prosecution.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants claimed plaintiff was arrested and charged with various crimes in 2011, following a traffic stop that escalated into a use of force. Following plaintiff's arrest, his apartment was searched and various contraband was found.

Defendants contended that they merely defended themselves when plaintiff attacked them. They contended that the contraband found in the home was accurately attributed to plaintiff, a felon that was in possession of a firearm. Defendants claimed that their actions were reasonable, lawful and constitutional.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff's last pre-trial demand was $440,000. Defendants offered $20,000.

Damages

Plaintiff claimed $500,000 in economic and non-economic damages at trial.

Injuries

Plaintiff claimed he suffered a ruptured eardrum because of the excessive force.

Result

Defense verdict.

Other Information

Plaintiff's criminal history was excluded from trial. Defense counsel represented plaintiff pro bono at the request of the court. FILING DATE: Nov. 18, 2011.

Deliberation

four hours

Length

three days


#105083

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390