Roger Mielke v. City of Huntington Beach, Huntington Beach Police Department, Bernard Atkins, and Does 1 through 50, inclusive
Published: Nov. 21, 2015 | Result Date: Aug. 14, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 30-2014-00729395-CU-PO-CJC Verdict – $28,000
Facts
Roger Mielke sued the City of Huntington Beach, Bernard Atkins, Huntington Beach Police Dept. and Jason McFall in connection with alleged civil rights violations.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged he was awakened at 2:00 a.m. on Aug. 24, 2013, when his dog began stirring. Plaintiff exited his bedroom and found defendant Officers Atkins and McFall in his living room. The officers were in the area in response to a loud radio complaint and happened upon plaintiff's apartment where they claimed they found the front door wide open. Plaintiff contended the officers claimed to have been performing a "community caretaking" function, when they entered plaintiff's residence to investigate. When plaintiff confronted the officers in his living room, Officer Atkins directed plaintiff to turn off his loud radio. Plaintiff explained that there was no radio playing in his apartment and demanded the officer leave. The "loud radio" was coming from an apartment in an adjacent building.
Plaintiff claimed that by their own admission, the officers did not hold a search warrant. Plaintiff contended that no exigent circumstances existed. When plaintiff's dog, a pit bull, stepped into the living room and positioned itself between plaintiff and the officers, Officer Atkins threatened to shoot the dog. Plaintiff explained the dog was docile and demanded the officers leave his home. The officers complied and left without ever asking plaintiff for identification or about the welfare of anyone else in the apartment. Plaintiff's roommate disputed the officers' claim that the front door was left open.
Mielke claimed violation of his civil rights and emotional upset and distress due to Officer Atkins' threat to shoot his dog.
DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The officers claimed they were responding to a disturbance call and found plaintiff's front door was open. They asserted a community caretaking exception to the warrant rule to perform a welfare check.
Settlement Discussions
Mielke demanded by way of a statutory offer, $75,000 in full and final settlement of his claim inclusive of attorney fees.
Result
The jury reached a verdict in favor of Mielke and awarded him $28,000 in damages, but did not award punitive damages, finding the officers lacked malice. Attorney fees in the case exceeded $200,000. The case was ultimately settled for the sum of $175,000.
Other Information
FILING DATE: June 19, 2014.
Deliberation
four hours
Length
six days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390