Hartsell

Hartsell v. San Diego, County of

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 26, 20203:16-cv-01094California1,225 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL A. HARTSELL, ) No. 16-cv-1094-LAB-LL ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANTS’ ) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE UNDER v. ) CAL. CIV. CODE § 3333.3 ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; SAN DIEGO ) COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF ) Trial Date: 9/28/20 @ 1:00 pm TRENTON STROH; DOES 1-15, ) Courtroom 14A ) Defendants. ) ) 15 In 2015, San Diego County Sheriff’s Deputy Trenton Stroh used a police dog to seize and retrieve a suspect, Plaintiff Michael Hartsell, who had fled into a thicket of bushes during the chase. During the encounter with Hartsell, the dog bit and held him. Following the initial deployment and bite—which the Court previously held to be subject to qualified immunity—Deputy Stroh directed Hartsell to crawl out of the thicket. Hartsell did so with the dog still attached to his arm. Stroh removed the dog once Hartsell was out of the thicket, but Hartsell alleges that he suffered severe injuries to his arm…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.