Some articles are in PDF format. If you can't view them, you can get Adobe's Acrobat Reader for FREE from Adobe's site.
Links may open in a new browser window.
BRENDA L. BANNON:
EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CASE AGAINST THE CITY OF AUBURN DISMISSED;
DEFENSE AWARD AT ARBITRATION, FOLLOWED BY STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL.
Peden v. City of Auburn. A Battallion Chief with the Fire Department alleged he could not work as a training officer on the day shift because of a medical condition. The City engaged in the requisite interactive process, sent the employee to an IME, and ultimately placed the employee on paid sick leave (against his wishes) until the condition diminished. The arbitrator returned a defense award on disability discrimination, retaliation and breach of contract claims.
POLICE CIVIL RIGHTS CASE AGAINST THE CITY OF TUKWILA DISMISSED FOLLOWING PLAINTIFFS DEPOSITION.
Gonzalez v. City of Tukwila, et al. Police officers responded to a call at the Southcenter Mall regarding a group of 200 youth congregating near the Food Court. Plaintiff was taken to the ground and pepper sprayed after repeatedly refusing the officers requests to leave the Mall or be arrested for trespass. Race discrimination, false arrest and excessive force claims were brought under 1983. After a full days deposition, two weeks before the discovery cut-off, Plaintiff agreed to a nonsuit.
ANDY COOLEY, STEW ESTES and KIMBERLY WALDBAUM:
On February 8th, Stewart Estes, Andy Cooley and Kimberly Waldbaum of the Seattle firm, Keating Bucklin and McCormack received a complete defense verdict after a Federal Class Action lawsuit that began on January 8th. The suit was brought by over 160 named plaintiffs representing a class of up to 800 Washington State University students and faculty members. The plaintiffs alleged a massive civil rights violation following police use of pepper spray in response to a night club fight. The representative plaintiffs sought damages of over $30 million, plus punitive damages, and sought compensatory damages for the hundreds of class members as well.
The case began as a routine police response to a fight in progress call. Officers from the City of Pullman responded and observed a group of 15-20 males involved in a brawl. The fight happened Saturday night after the first Washington State University home football game , and involved numerous members of rival fraternities. The Pullman officers discharged Oleoresin Capsicum or "pepper spray" onto the fighters. Fumes were carried upstairs into a nightclub by the ventilation system. Plaintiffs claimed that the use of pepper spray was excessive force, and negligent. They alleged the police were motivated by racial animus, since all of the people fighting were African-American. Plaintiffs also sought injunctive relief, requiring certain training and policy changes in the department.
The US District Court in Spokane allowed all federal claims to go to the jury. These included claims of excessive force , Due Process violations, and race discrimination. The jury was out a day and one-half before returning a defense verdict on all claims. It is believed that this is the largest civil rights class action case to go to verdict is U.S. history.
STEW ESTES:
Stew was admitted to the prestigious Washington Appellate Lawyers Association.
Stew presented at the WCIA Police Command Staff Seminar on the issue of Crisis Intervention Team Training - Dealing with the Mentally Ill. For the past year, Stew has been working to implement statewide training for police officers in this area. He currently serves on the Governor’s CIT Training Steering Committee, which is creating a pilot program to commence this fall.
In March of 2007, Stew obtained the dismissal of all federal claims brought against the Seattle School District in two child sex abuse lawsuits. Both involve allegations of molestation of female students by their fifth grade teacher, now in prison. According to Plaintiffs, the cases involve the “longest duration … most muti-victim … most repeatedly witnessed … and most often reported to the administrators” case “in the known history of … the School District.” They filed state law negligence claims, and asserted the violation of their civil rights under Title IX and the Civil rights Act.
Plaintiffs originally filed suit in King County Superior Court. We removed the case to federal court in late 2005, and spent the next year deep in discovery, with numerous depositions and interviews recorded. We moved for summary judgment on all federal claims in December. Shortly before trial, we were able to get U.S. District Court Judge Ricardo Martinez to see through the hyperbole and dismiss all federal claims and remand the state law claims to state court. This effectively ended any chance the Plaintiffs had for punitive damages or attorneys’ fees, which they claim to be enormous.
The case is now in Superior Court, to be tried on the negligence claims. We also were successful in obtaining a Tegman order, which will require the jury to segregate damages between the defendants and the perpetrator.
SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC DUTY DOCTRINE CASE DECIDED.
The Washington Court of Appeals handed down a decision that has a significant impact on all cities that operate a water supply system. This month, the Supreme Courtdismissed Plaintiffs' petition for review. The court in Stiefel v City of Kent (PDF), 132 Wn. App. 523; 132 P.3d 1111 (2005), review dismissed, __ Wn 2d __ (2006), dealt with a situation where the plaintiffs' home burned because the fire department's city-maintained water supply failed, allegedly due to rust deposits in a water main that the city had failed to "flush." Plaintiffs relied on a number of cases that hold that a city's operation of a water system is a proprietary function that renders the city liable for negligence. Stew was able toconvince the court that even though the water system was proprietary, the water was actually being used at the time in a governmental function -- fire fighting. Thus, the public duty doctrine shielded the city, even though the exact acts a=of negligence would render the city liable if the same water was used in a different way. The court held:
"The general rule is that supplying water for public purposes, such as fire protection services, is a governmental function and that a municipality is not liable for damages for the negligent failure to supply water for extinguishing fires.* ** Because their claims are directed solely to the governmental function of fire protection services, including the incidental delivery of water through fire hydrants, the claims are barred by the public duty doctrine."Id.at530.
JAYNE FREEMAN:
Congratulations to Jayne L. Freeman for successfully defending the Issaquah Police Department in the inquest In Re: the death of John Pestana. Following a one week trial, the jury returned with a verdict in favor of the Department, finding that a knife-wielding suspect posed an an imminent lethal threat to detectives before he was shot and killed. [ PDF ]
Congratulations to Jayne Freeman for successful Div. I appeal affirming summary judgment dismissal of $3 million disability discrimination lawsuit filed by former police officer in Hopkins v. City of Bothell.
[ Opinion Copy ]
BROCK GAVERY:
Summary judgment dismissal of lawsuit against City of Fife in which the plaintiff alleged wrongful arrest and false imprisonment.
RICHARD JOLLEY:
Smith v. City of Auburn and Officer Andy Suver (February 2007)-Richard represented the city of Auburn and Officer Suver in a federal civil rights trial based on alleged excessive force and wrongful arrest of Plaintiff. Plaintiff claimed that his rights were violated when he was bitten and injured by a police dog at the conclusion of a dog track which began at the scene of a commercial burglary. Plaintiff also claimed that the police department's policies on use of canines to bite and hold criminal suspects was unconstitutional. Following a five day trial in U.S. District court in Seattle, the jury concluded that neither Officer Suver or the City of Auburn had done anything wrong and returned a defense verdict.
Brutsche v. Cities of Auburn, Federal Way, Tukwila, Kent, Port of Seattle and Twelve Individual Police Officers (April 2007) - Richard represented a number of cities and police officers from the South King County SWAT team in a lawsuit alleging constitutional violations. The suit stemmed from service of a high risk search warrant by the SWAT team at a suspected methamphetamine location in July 2003. Plaintiff suffered significant injuries as he attempted to prevent the SWAT team from entering the residence and taking him into custody. Summary judgment dismissal was granted for eight of the individual officers, but Plaintiff's claims against four officers and a number of cities went to the jury. Following an eight day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the officers and the cities on all of Plaintiff's claims.
SHANNON RAGONESI:
Dismissal of lawsuit against City of Mountlake Terrace and four police officers alleging negligence during a police pursuit which resulted in a collision between a criminal suspect and a motorist. The court dismissed all claims against the defendants, stating the officers were complying with their legal duty to detain impaired drivers, and the officers used due care for the safety of the public throughout the pursuit.
