San Diego, California — A significant legal battle has concluded in favor of San Diego County after years of litigation surrounding a sheriff’s deputy’s excessive use of force against a handcuffed man. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned a jury’s 2022 decision, reducing a $5 million award to Mickail Myles to a maximum of $1.5 million.
The appellate court’s ruling, released on May 12, determined that there was insufficient evidence indicating lasting physical damage from the incident. The judges noted that Myles did not experience any permanent harm, apart from minor scarring from a police dog bite. They stated that he retains full physical and intellectual capabilities.
In addition to reducing the damages, the court dismissed a prior ruling that mandated San Diego County to pay nearly $6 million in legal fees to Myles’ attorneys. The justices remarked that due to the remand concerning the reduction of damages, the award for attorney fees needed to be vacated as a matter of course.
This ruling represents a rare legal win for both San Diego County and its Sheriff’s Department, which has faced various claims of negligence and misconduct resulting in substantial costs to taxpayers in recent years. The department has been scrutinized for its history of disproportionately stopping and questioning individuals of color, a factor highlighted by Myles’ legal team in the midst of this case.
County officials have expressed approval of the appellate court’s findings, emphasizing that the ruling validated their legal arguments. “The 9th Circuit’s careful analysis identified prejudicial errors that affected the trial’s fairness and inflated the damages awarded to the plaintiff,” a spokesperson stated.
Myles’ attorneys view the appellate decision as a partial triumph, as it upheld the jury’s conclusion regarding misconduct. “I don’t see it as a setback; it’s a victory for civil rights and public accountability in San Diego County,” said attorney Daniel Balaban. He emphasized that while they would have preferred the original award to be maintained, the primary goal was to hold the Sheriff’s Department accountable for their actions.
Myles, a former preschool teacher, experienced the incident in 2014 when he was pulled over by deputies in Fallbrook. He had just picked up his brother from a roller rink when the deputies mistakenly identified him as a suspect in an unrelated incident. While following the officers’ orders, Myles was struck by Deputy Jeremy Banks and attacked by a police dog, resulting in severe bites.
Despite witnesses confirming that Myles was cooperative during the encounter, he was arrested on suspicion of resisting arrest. The District Attorney’s Office ultimately did not pursue charges against him. Myles filed a lawsuit against the county and Banks in 2015, but the case did not go to trial until 2022. Testimonies from multiple deputies indicated that Myles was compliant during the assault.
The trial revealed that Deputy Banks had a history of excessive force accusations and that his police dog had been known for aggressive behavior. A federal judge noted that the county failed to produce key evidence, significantly hampering the defense’s ability to contest the claims. The court observed a lack of compliance from the defendants regarding the discovery process, a decision that influenced the awarded legal fees.
The 9th Circuit court found the legal fees awarded to Myles’ attorneys to be excessive, citing issues with calculations and the decision to apply a fee multiplier based on the county’s actions. A district court may impose different sanctions for inappropriate conduct rather than relying solely on financial penalties, the judges stated.
Following a hearing on June 18, the district court announced a timeline for motions related to revising the damages award. The attorneys for Myles must submit motions by August 1, with counterarguments from the county due by August 18. Discussions surrounding legal fees will commence only after a new damages figure has been established.
This article was automatically written by OpenAI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by contacting contact@publiclawlibrary.org.