The city of Victorville’s $33.5 million litigation loss is likely to set a policy precedent statewide, according to an Orange County lawyer.
A San Bernardino superior court jury issued the award to the children of Jose Ruvalcaba, an alleged transient and addict, who died in 2018 after a physical altercation with three city workers.
“It behooves the city to pass out the instruction that if you get attacked, just use enough force and run but don't kill the guy unless the guy is using deadly force himself,” said attorney John Shu. “The homeless problem is, in certain counties like LA County or San Francisco County, just terrible."
Some 69,144 people in Los Angeles County are in a state of transience or are experiencing homelessness nightly, according to the 2022 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count.
“It is reasonably foreseeable that it could happen again where some city worker somewhere gets assaulted," Shu said.
In Estate of Jose Ruvalcaba v. City of Victorville, it was alleged that the now deceased Ruvalcaba had assaulted city of Victorville roadway painters, but he was unarmed and his estate's attorneys argued that the roadside workers used unnecessary force to defend themselves.
“California does not have a stand-your-ground law so, in some ways, the plaintiffs could have argued that they had a duty to retreat,” Shu told the Southern California Record.
Stand Your Ground laws in states like Texas and Florida allow a citizen to use force in the process of protecting themselves when they believe the force is required in defense of another individual's use or attempted use of force.
Ruvalcaba was struck in the head with a shovel during the dispute with the three workers, according to media reports.
“The problem was the disparity of force,” Shu added. “You had three guys, who are city workers who are strong and healthy, fighting a guy who's not, and one of them had a shovel, which in some ways could be considered assault with a deadly weapon.”
While the city of Victorville had offered $3.5 million to settle the case, the jury awarded $33.85 million, however, the jury award could be reduced on appeal, according to Shu.
“It’s not so much an appeal of the liability because they already stipulated to it at trial, but an appeal of the amount of the award as excessive,” he said. “If they do threaten to appeal, what will probably happen is they'll settle the case for some amount in the middle between $3.5 million and $33.85 million.”