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
42 U.S.C. 1983

James Washburn v. Alex Fagan, Jr., et al.

Published: Aug. 12, 2006 | Result Date: May 17, 2006 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 303CV00869 Verdict –  Defense

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Ben T. Rosenfeld

Dennis Cunningham


Defendant

Sean F. Connolly
(Office of the San Francisco City Attorney)

David B. Newdorf
(Newdorf Legal)


Experts

Defendant

Donald S. Cameron
(technical)

Michael Slade
(technical)

Facts

One night in January 2002, plaintiff James Washburn, 30s, was walking in San Francisco on his way home from a party. He wore a hat from a costume that consisted of fake sunflowers protruding from a headband. He was also carrying a drum. The plaintiff alleged that he was suddenly grabbed by two San Francisco city police officers: defendants Alex Fagan and Walter Contreras. He further alleged that the defendants tackled him, demanded to know what drugs he had taken and handcuffed him. The plaintiff was arrested for blocking traffic, public drunkenness and resisting arrest.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff sued the city of San Francisco, Fagan and Contreras, alleging violations of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 by their use of excessive force. He also brought a Fourth Amendment claim and a Monell claim, alleging violations of his constitutional rights. The plaintiff claimed defendants had no legitimate reason to stop him and that he was singled out based solely on his unusual appearance in that he was wearing a sunflower hat and carrying a drum.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defendants defeated the Fourth Amendment and Monell claims on motions for summary judgment. The only claim remaining was excessive force to be tried to the jury.

The defense challenged the plaintiff's account of the incident. The defendant officers testified that they first saw plaintiff standing in the middle of the street. They stated he looked disorientated and was blocking traffic. This prompted them to pull over the plaintiff and get out of their vehicle to question the plaintiff and assess his well-being. The officers asserted that when they approached the plaintiff, he turned away and then moved his hand toward his waist. This gesture can be indicative of reaching for a weapon which is why they grabbed the plaintiff's arms to restrain him according to their training. The officers alleged that he struggled, causing them to wrestle him to the ground.

Damages

The plaintiff sought an unspecified amount of damages for emotional distress and sought to recover attorney fees.

Result

The jury found the officers did not use excessive force and held the city was not liable.

Deliberation

three days

Poll

8-0

Length

seven days


#92641

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

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