Practice Areas

Related Case Studies

Print to PDF Print to PDF

Civil Rights - Representative Experience

  • Issues
  • Venue
  • Client Type
  • Lawyers
  • Full Description
  • Result
  • Civil Rights; 28 USC 1983; Injunction; Contempt
  • USDC: Northern District of California
  • Defendant Municipality Police Officers
  • J. Mark Thacker
  • Represented a city and individual police officers in two separate actions in defense of the plaintiffs' claims for the alleged violation of their civil rights. The plaintiffs alleged that they were prevented from exercising their freedom of speech rights because they were denied access to certain areas of public property, and on one occasion when they were arrested. The plaintiffs claimed entitlement to substantial civil penalties under applicable state and federal statutes (Civil Code sec. 52.1 and 28 USC 1983).

     

  • We were brought into the case after an injunction had already been entered and after the plaintiffs had filed a motion for summary judgment. We substantially defeated the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on several claims, and obtained a favorable adjudication of our clients' claims for qualified immunity on most claims. Thereafter, we defeated the plaintiffs' contempt motion (based on violation of the preliminary injunction) after a three-day evidentiary hearing. Additionally, we eliminated all of the plaintiffs' claims for substantial civil penalties (in excess of $500,000) by obtaining a favorable ruling from the district court interpreting the applicable state statute (Civil Code sec. 52.1) to preclude all such penalties. We also prevailed in defeating the plaintiffs' petition to the 9th Circuit for permission to appeal the ruling.
     

  • Civil Rights; Discrimination; Wrongful Termination; Indian Preference Act
  • USDC: Northern District of California
  • Defendant Health Care Center
  • David M. McLaughlin
  • Represented an Indian health center in a civil rights, discrimination and wrongful termination action involving the Indian Preference Act.

     

  • The matter was resolved in mediation to our client’s satisfaction.

  • TRO/Injunctive Relief Due to Threatening Conduct
  • Santa Clara County Superior Court
  • Law Firm
  • Gregory M. Gentile
  • Opposition party in pending real estate litigation with clients of firm made threatening comments by voice-mail to attorney.  Given the past experience with the party, a restraining order was sought and obtained following a court trial before the Honorable Derek Woodhouse.  Opposition party has filed an appeal.

  • Following a court trial in which testimony was taken and evidence received, the Court granted the restraining order.