Public Entity Team

The Public Entity Group of Low, Ball & Lynch represents municipalities, transportation districts, airports, school and recreation districts, hospitals, and water and sanitation districts throughout California in all aspects of litigation.

Low, Ball & Lynch handles all types of premises liability and personal injury cases, and specializes in defending wrongful termination and discrimination suits; federal civil rights claims, including those brought against police departments, and inverse condemnation claims. Our attorneys not only defend pending claims, they work with clients to prevent future claims by conducting risk management sessions and presenting seminars on various areas of government tort liability practice. Low, Ball & Lynch is a leader in public entity defense in California and stays on top of issues in this often changing and challenging area of law.

Because the firm is acutely aware of the needs of its government clients and consistently meets those needs, Low, Ball & Lynch’s public entity practice is thriving. We aggressively defend claims on a cost efficient basis, and prevent future claims through client education. Low, Ball & Lynch is committed to providing "full-service" representation to its clients in all aspects of public entity defense.

For more information regarding our public entity practice, contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Shareholders		Associates
Mark Hazelwood*		Kevin Allen
Dale Allen*		Kimberly Chin
Linda Meyer*
Dirk Larsen

* Practice group chairs

Public Entity Team News         
 
  Public Entity Publications  
Ninth Circuit Holds that Jurisdiction Exists as to Homeless Individuals' Eighth Amendment Challenges to Local Camping and Sleeping Ordinances
Bell, et. al. v. City of Boise, et. al.
By Kimberly Chin
California Highway Patrol Has No Duty to Come to Aid of an Injured Party Absent a “Special Relationship”Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Department of the California Highway Patrol 
By Kimberly Chin
Dangerous Conditions of Public Property and Third-Party Conduct: The Alleged Condition Must Cause the Conduct, Not Just the Injury Cordova v. City of Los Angeles
 
By Dirk Larsen  
California Supreme Court Affirms Express Delivery Provisions of Government Claims ActHope DiCampli-Mintz v. County of Santa Clara, et al.  
By Kimberly Chin
ADA Defendant Granted Attorney Fees as a “Prevailing Party”Les Jankey v. Song Koo LeeBy Laura Flynn
Ninth Circuit Recognizes Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Protections for Unabandoned but Unattended Personal Possessions of Homeless IndividualsTony Lavan, et. al. v. City of Los Angeles
By Kimberly Chin
  
SEE MORE

Dale Allen and Dirk Larsen Obtain a Ninth Circuit Reversal

Shareholders Dale Allen and Dirk Larsen recently obtained the Ninth Circuit’s reversal of the district court’s denial of partial summary judgment in a police-practices case. In the decision, the Ninth Circuit agreed that a police officer who deployed up to four Taser cycles in an attempt to control a suspect could not be liable to the individual’s family for his use of the Taser. The suspect died shortly after the encounter, and his family argued that he should not have been tased because a scar on his chest indicated an implanted pacemaker. The Ninth Circuit held that, as of the time of the incident, clearly established law did not prohibit the use of the Taser under the circumstances.

Dirk Larsen Obtains Summary Judgment on Two Public Entity Cases

In Ti v. BARTD, the plaintiff alleged that she was injured when train doors closed on her as she paused in the doorway while entering a BART train. The court found that the closing of train doors does not pose a substantial risk of harm to foreseeable users exercising due care, and thus does not constitute a dangerous condition of public property within the meaning of Government Code §835.

In Lee v. Greater Vallejo Recreation District and City of Vallejo, the plaintiff alleged that he was injured when he was struck by a limb that fell from a eucalyptus tree at a park owned by the City of Vallejo and operated by the Greater Vallejo Recreation District. The court found that the falling limb constituted a natural condition of unimproved property, thus immunizing the City and District from liability under Government Code §831.2. In doing so, it rejected the plaintiff's argument that eucalyptus trees are not "natural conditions" because they are not native to California. The court also found that the wooden footbridge on which the plaintiff was standing constituted a recreational trail, thus also immunizing the City and District from liability under Government Code §831.4.

Associate Kevin Allen Obtains Summary Adjudication in a Public Entity Case

In Pryor v. City of Clearlake, et al., a federal civil rights action, the plaintiff alleged violation of constitutional rights against the City and individual officers. Officers arrested Plaintiff in his home after, among other things, Plaintiff threatened to kill his own brother, as well as the assembled officers. Plaintiff was tased twice during the arrest, with the second tasing after Plaintiff was shot multiple time by another officer. The officer fired because he (the officer) was on the ground, Plaintiff was approaching him, and the officer believed Plaintiff had a knife.The Court granted summary adjudication to various causes of action, including unlawful entry, excessive force on the Taser use, equal protection, and Monell liability. On unlawful entry, the Court found: (1) the claim was barred by collateral estoppel; (2) officers had consent to enter the residence; and (3) an emergency situation existed. On excessive force, the Court found the first tasing was lawful force, and that both tasings were protected by qualified immunity. On equal protection, the Court found no evidence the City had an unlawful custom, policy, or practice.