Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.MixedFiled July 13, 2021

Steward v. County of Santa Clara

Judge
Susan Illston
Docket
3:18-cv-04119
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
11
Civil RightsSection 1983Civil ProcedureTort
In one sentence

In Steward v. County of Santa Clara, Judge Illston entered judgment for Steward against Deputy West for $11,000 but against Steward on other claims.

Who this affects

Aaron Steward prevailed against Deputy Rico West on the July 12, 2017 altercation claims and received $11,000 plus an award of attorney’s fees for those claims. He did not prevail on the claims concerning West’s November 2016 search or Deputy Christopher Graham’s July 2017 transport ride.

What happened

In Steward v. County of Santa Clara, Aaron Steward sued over a 2016 jail search and a 2017 altercation and transport ride. After an earlier summary-judgment ruling, the remaining claims involved Deputy Rico West and Deputy Christopher Graham. The parties agreed to a trial without a jury.

The court found that West used objectively unreasonable force by repeatedly striking Steward’s head with a pepper-spray can while Steward was face down and not resisting. It also found that this conduct violated the Fourteenth Amendment and California’s Bane Act. Steward did not properly use the jail’s grievance process for the 2016 search, and he did not prove that Graham used force during the 2017 transport ride. Steward also failed to prove severe emotional distress for his emotional-distress claim.

Judge Susan Illston entered judgment for Steward against West on the 2017 altercation claims and awarded $10,000 in compensatory damages and $1,000 in punitive damages. The court entered judgment against Steward on his claims against West concerning the 2016 search and against Graham concerning the 2017 ride, and awarded attorney’s fees for the successful altercation claims against West.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Steward v. County of Santa Clara · No. 3:18-cv-04119
Judge
Susan Illston
Date
July 13, 2021

Background

Aaron Steward, a pretrial detainee at the Santa Clara County jail, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force under the Fourteenth Amendment, under California Civil Code § 52.1 (the Bane Act), and for intentional infliction of emotional distress. After an earlier summary-judgment ruling, the claims remaining for trial concerned Deputy Rico West’s conduct during a November 7, 2016 contraband search and a July 12, 2017 altercation, and Deputy Christopher Graham’s conduct during a July 12, 2017 transport-van ride. The parties waived a jury trial.

November 2016 Search

The court found that deputies conducted a contraband search after receiving an anonymous tip. Steward was strip searched, underwent a rectal cavity search, and was placed on a “potty watch,” during which his stool was checked for drugs. No drugs were found. The court found that West did not decide to conduct the strip search, did not falsely claim to see contraband, and did not prompt the rectal cavity search.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires incarcerated people to use available jail grievance procedures before bringing certain federal claims. The court found that Elmwood had a formal grievance procedure that Steward knew about, but that Steward did not file a grievance concerning the November 2016 search. The court therefore found that he did not satisfy the exhaustion requirement for his § 1983 claim against West concerning that search.

July 2017 Altercation

The court found that West entered Steward’s cell alone after finding a homemade lighter, pushed Steward twice, and became involved in a tussle with him. West then lifted Steward over his knee and moved him onto the tier. After Steward was face down with his hands at his sides, West knelt on his lower back, pepper-sprayed his face, and repeatedly struck his head with the pepper-spray can. The court found that Steward was not actively resisting at that point, that West’s perception of a threat was unreasonable, and that West’s repeated strikes were objectively unreasonable. Steward suffered a deep laceration above his right eye and continued to experience painful headaches.

The court concluded that West’s use of force violated Steward’s Fourteenth Amendment rights and § 1983. It also concluded that the same conduct violated the Bane Act, which provides a claim for interference with constitutional or other legal rights through threats, intimidation, or coercion. The court found that Steward did not prove his intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim because he did not establish severe or extreme emotional distress.

July 2017 Transport Ride

After the altercation, Graham drove Steward in a transport van to the main jail, with Deputy Holly riding in the passenger seat. At the jail, deputies found Steward lying on the van’s floor in a fetal position and later transported him to a hospital. The court found that Steward could not testify about the transport and that the video did not show the ride itself or establish that Graham stopped, swerved, or acted to punish him. The court therefore found that Steward did not prove his claims against Graham by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning that the evidence did not make his version more likely than not.

Damages and Disposition

Judge Susan Illston awarded Steward $10,000 in compensatory damages against West for the July 2017 altercation. The court also found that West acted with reckless or callous disregard for Steward’s rights or safety and awarded $1,000 in punitive damages. The total judgment in Steward’s favor against West for the July 2017 altercation was $11,000.

The court entered judgment against Steward on his claims against West concerning the November 2016 search and against Graham concerning the July 2017 ride. The court also awarded attorney’s fees to Steward to the extent of his successful claims against West for the July 2017 altercation, without stating the fee amount in this opinion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.