Date: 12-18-2009

Case Style: Michael James Evans v. Multnomah County, Richard Hathaway and Robert Griffith

Case Number: 3:07-cv-01532-BR

Judge: Anna Brown

Court: United States District Court for the District of Oregon (Multnomah County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Benjamin Haile and Leah Greenwald, Haile Greenwald, L.L.P., Portland, Oregon

Defendant's Attorney: Carlos J. Calandriello and Stephen Lewis Madkour, Multnomah County Attorney's Office, Portland, Oregon

David A. Landrum, Portland City Attorney's Office, Portland, Oregon

Description: Michael James Evans, age 42, sued Multnomah County Oregon Sheriff's Deputies Richard Hathaway and Robert Griffith on civil rights violation theories under 42 U.S.C. 1983 claiming that they used excessive force when they forced him to the floor and punched him numerous times after he tugged his arm away from Deputy Hathaway's grasp while being booked after being arrested on a domestic assault and battery charge filed by his girlfriend. A video tape of the incident appeared to show that Evans did not resist. Evans suffered a broken nose, two black eyes, a gash on his forehead and a bruise across his back.

Plaintiff sued Hathaway, Griffith, Gorton and Albertson as individuals on 4th Amendment/excessive force claims. The City defended Portland Police Bureau Officer Albertson. The County defended County Sheriff’s Deputies Hathaway, Griffith and Gorton. The City and County are separate, distinct, independent governmental entities.

Plaintiff also had a state common law claim of Assault against Multnomah County (based on the conduct of Deputy Gorton) and state common law claims of battery against Multnomah County (based on the conduct of deputies Hathaway and Griffith). Operation of the Oregon Tort Claims Act requires that those claims be brought against the public body, rather than that public body’s employee. Plaintiff was awarded $250 on the battery claim against the County based on the conduct of Deputy Hathaway. Under Oregon law, plaintiff is not entitled to recover attorney fees on this state common law claim.


Plaintiff brought a state common law claim for battery against the City of Portland (based on the conduct of Portland Police Officer Albertson). The jury found against plaintiff on that claim, the City prevailed on that claim.

The plaintiff also brought a 14th Amendment Due Process claim of Malicious Prosecution against Deputy Hathaway, because plaintiff had been criminally charged with Assault on a Public Safety Officer based on the events at issue in the trial. That criminal charge was later dismissed. The jury found against the plaintiff on that claim, too.

The County had made an offer of judgment for substantially more than the $250 plaintiff was awarded on the 4th Amendment Claim against Deputy Hathaway. Thus plaintiff’s recovery for attorney fees under 42 USC §1988 will be limited on that basis. Moreover, the court will likely limit any attorney fee recovery based on plaintiff’s lack of success. Plaintiff had pled, and argued at trial, that he should recover a total of $60,000 in noneconomic damages and $360,000 in punitive damages from a total of 6 Defendants (Hathaway, Griffith, Gorton, Albertson, City of Portland and Multnomah County). Instead, plaintiff recovered a total of $250 from Deputy Hathaway, and $250 from Multnomah County.

The City had also made a substantial offer of judgment, but in the end plaintiff recovered nothing from his claims against Officer Albertson and the City of Portland. Those defendants will likely be awarded their costs from this litigation, which commenced in October 2007.

It is also worthwhile to note that although plaintiff is serving long sentences in state prison for felonies, the jury was not advised of the nature of his convictions or the length of his sentences. Instead, because he was in the custody of state department of corrections personnel in the courtroom, the jury was advised that the plaintiff was in custody, nothing more. He was dressed in street clothes, and his hands were not restrained.

Outcome: Plaintiff's verdict for $500.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: Editor's Comments: Plaintiff is in prison and will not get out until he is an old man. That a jury would find in his favor is pretty amazing despite the bad acts of the defendants which were captured on video. It is possible that the Plaintiff's attorneys will be paid for their time and out-of-pocket expenses by the County.