Eduardo Cervantes v. County of Los Angeles et al

Filing 134

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR REMITTITUR by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: The award of damages is remitted from $900,000 to $500,000. Plaintiff shall have fourteen days from the date of this Order to accept or reject the remittitur. Should Plaintiff accept, a final judgment shall issue. Should Plaintiff reject the remittitur, the court shall grant Defendants Motion for a New Trial in the Alternative. (lc). Modified on 9/3/2015 (lc).

1
2

O

3
4

CLOSED

5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EDUARDO CERVANTES,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17
18

v.
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES;
DEPUTY PAUL CRUZ #412035
individually and as a peace
officer; DEPUTY VICTOR
CISNEROS #519470
individually and as a peace
officer,
Defendants.
___________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CV 12-09889 DDP (MRWx)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR REMITTITUR

[Dkt. 126]

19
20

Presently before the court is Defendants Paul Cruz and Victor

21

Cisneros’ Motion for Remittitur.

22

of the parties and heard oral argument, the court grants the motion

23

and adopts the following Order.

24

I.

25

Having considered the submissions

Background
Plaintiff Eduardo Cervantes alleged that Defendants Cisneros

26

and Cruz, two Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies, used excessive

27

force on Plaintiff in the course of an arrest.

28

at trial that on November 23, 2010, he was looking at his cell

Plaintiff testified

1

phone in his parked car in the parking lot of a billiards hall when

2

Defendants ordered Plaintiff to leave his vehicle.

3

testified that Defendants then punched Plaintiff in the face and

4

neck and took Plaintiff to the ground, upon which he struck his

5

head.

6

went to the ground, but did not clearly record the incident in

7

further detail.

8
9

Plaintiff

Surveillance video confirmed that Plaintiff and Defendants

Photos of Plaintiff after the incident show a bruised and
swollen eye and scrapes on Plaintiff’s face and the back of his

10

head.

11

similar injuries.

12

told him several times that he “was fine.”

13

prescribed Plaintiff 800 milligrams of ibuprofen, which Plaintiff

14

had already been taking for pain related to his prosthetic leg.

15

Plaintiff disagreed with the doctor’s assessment, and testified

16

that he still has occasional pain in and around his eye, and that

17

he has suffered from floaters in his vision since the incident.

18

Plaintiff acknowledged on cross examination, however, that while

19

working a construction job in 2012, he was struck in the head by a

20

falling chimney.

21

A video interview of Plaintiff after the arrest shows
Plaintiff testified that his treating physician
The doctor also

Plaintiff further testified that he suffers from emotional

22

pain from the incident.

Although Plaintiff only spent “a few

23

hours” in jail, it pained him to tell his family that he had been

24

incarcerated.

25

had been in jail prior to the incident as well.

26

testified that he has difficulty sleeping and suffers from

27

nightmares about being framed or killed by police officers, and

28

that he is now very nervous about going out in public for fear of

On cross examination, Plaintiff acknowledged that he

2

Plaintiff

1

being pulled over and assaulted.

2

to visit the billiard hall every day even after the incident.1

3

Plaintiff did, however, continue

Defendants did not put on a case.

During closing arguments,

4

Plaintiff’s attorney asked the jury to award $900,000.

5

included $200,000 for past physical pain, $300,000 for past

6

emotional pain and suffering, and $400,000 for future pain and

7

suffering.

8

and awarded him $900,000.2

9

II.

10

This figure

After deliberating, the jury found for the Plaintiff
Defendants now move for a remittitur.

Discussion
When a court determines that a damages award is excessive, it

11

may grant a defendant’s motion for a new trial or conditionally

12

deny the motion, provided the plaintiff accepts a remittitur.

13

Fenner v. Dependable Trucking Co., Inc., 716 F.2d 598, 603 (9th

14

Cir. 1983); Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(a)(1)(A).

15

reduced damage award, “must reflect the maximum amount sustainable

16

by the proof.”

17

Cir. 2014) (internal quotation and citation omitted).

18

plaintiff may choose either to accept the reduced damage award or

19

to submit to a new trial.

20

The remittitur, or

Oracle Corp. v. SAP AG, 765 F.3d 1081. 1094 (9th
The

Fenner, 716 F.2d at 603.

As an initial matter, the court rejects Defendants’ contention

21

that, to the extent the jury awarded any damages for Plaintiff’s

22

future pain and suffering, such award violated the court’s

23
24
25
1

26
27
28

Plaintiff had aspirations to be a professional billiards
player.
2

The jury also found that Defendant Cisneros acted
maliciously, oppressively, or in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s
rights, but awarded no punitive damages.
3

1

instructions.3

2

instructed the jury to consider, among other factors in determining

3

the amount of compensatory damages, “the nature and extent of the

4

injuries” and “the physical, emotional pain and suffering

5

experienced.”

6

ongoing nature of Plaintiff’s physical and emotional injuries.4

7

The court’s jury instruction number eighteen

That instruction sufficiently encompassed the

Defendants and Plaintiff cite to a series of verdicts in civil

8

rights cases to support their respective arguments that the jury’s

9

damages award here was or was not excessive.

Damage awards,

10

however, “turn on the facts of each case.”

Mattschei v. United

11

States, 600 F.2d 205, 209 (9th Cir. 1979).

“While analogies to,

12

and comparisons with, other cases may be helpful on many types of

13

issues, their usefulness on questions of damages is extremely

14

limited.”

15

1975).

16

utility by their presence on the extreme ends of the factual

17

spectrum.

18

did not behave in any unlawful or dangerous manner, nor were his

19

physical injuries in any way life-threatening or severe.

United States v. English, 521 F.2d 63, 72 (9th Cir.

The comparisons drawn here are further limited in their

Unlike the plaintiffs in the cases cited, Plaintiff here

20
21
22
23
24
25

3

Plaintiff’s objection regarding the timeliness of
Defendants’ motion is overruled. The clerk’s Judgment on the
Verdict (Dkt. 113), entered after the return of the Special Verdict
Form, to which Plaintiffs did not object, (Dkt. 100, 101) was not a
Final Judgment, as explicitly stated in the Judgment on the Verdict
itself.
4

26
27
28

Although Defendants now contend that the instruction should
have included the words “and which with reasonable probability will
be experienced in the future,” Defendants raised no such argument
or objection at the time jury instructions were argued. See 9th
Cir. Manual of Model Civ. Instructions No. 5.2 (2007).
4

1

Defendants focus on the extent of Plaintiff’s physical

2

injuries.

3

repeatedly declared him to be “fine,” as well as Plaintiff’s

4

subsequent on-the-job head injury, the evidence showed relatively

5

minor, though not insignificant, physical harm from the incident.

6

Plaintiff suffered bruising and swelling of the face and a

7

contusion to the back of his head after being tackled backward to

8

the pavement.

9

internal ocular bleeding.

10
11

Even putting aside evidence that Plaintiff’s physician

He continues to suffer headaches, eye pain, and some
Defendants presented no medical evidence

to refute Plaintiff’s claims.
As Defendants acknowledge, a damage award for emotional

12

distress may be based on a plaintiff’s testimony alone.

See Zhang

13

v.American Gem Seafoods, 339 F.2d 1020, 1040 (9th Cir. 2003).

14

Nevertheless, Defendants’ argument that the court should reduce the

15

award to no more than $75,000 appears to discount the evidence of

16

Plaintiff’s emotional injuries.

17

distress during and immediately after the incident, which triggered

18

painful memories of bullying and feelings of humiliation,

19

embarrassment, and shame.

20

effects, including nightmares, difficulty sleeping, and fear of

21

encountering law enforcement so severe that it impinged upon

22

Plaintiff’s ability to leave the house and enjoy activities with

23

his family in public spaces.

24

situation might well have lent particular credence to his

25

accounting of his emotional distress.

26

leg, was sitting in a parked car, with the windows down, in a

27

parking lot on private property while examining his new cell phone

28

in broad daylight.

Plaintiff experienced emotional

The incident caused lingering emotional

The particulars of Plaintiff’s

Plaintiff, who has only one

He was then ordered out of his vehicle based on
5

1

the officers’ assessment that his car windows were illegally

2

tinted.

3

punched in the face and tackled backward to the pavement.

4

of these unique circumstances could exacerbate what otherwise might

5

have been milder emotional injuries.

6

Within seconds of exiting the vehicle, Plaintiff was
Evidence

Considering the totality of the evidence presented, the court

7

finds that the jury’s award of $900,000 in compensatory damages was

8

excessive.5

9

significantly higher than the $75,000 maximum advocated by

That said, the evidence could support an amount

10

Defendants.

11

was sufficient to support a maximum award of $500,000.

12

III. Conclusion

13

The court concludes that the evidence before the jury

For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion for

14

Remittitur is GRANTED.

15

$900,000 to $500,000.

16

date of this Order to accept or reject the remittitur.

17

Plaintiff accept, a final judgment shall issue.

18

reject the remittitur, the court shall grant Defendants’ Motion for

19

a New Trial in the Alternative.

The award of damages is remitted from
Plaintiff shall have fourteen days from the
Should

Should Plaintiff

20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23
24

Dated: September 3, 2015
DEAN D. PREGERSON
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28

5

The court also notes that at the time of the trial, there
were news stories about instances of excessive force occurring
throughout the country.
6