From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bell v. Williams

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Oct 18, 2022
18-cv-01245-SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2022)

Opinion

18-cv-01245-SI

10-18-2022

VINCENT KEITH BELL, Plaintiff, v. YVETTE WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants.


JUDGMENT

SUSAN ILLSTON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Following a jury trial and briefing and a hearing on injunctive relief, judgment is hereby entered in favor of Vincent Keith Bell and against defendants Yvette Williams and the City and County of San Francisco. Bell is awarded:

(1) $504,000 in compensatory damages from the City and County of San Francisco; and

(2) an injunction requiring the City and County of San Francisco to modify its policies on safety cell placements and SORT cell extractions to require staff to consider reasonable accommodations, including during the planning phase of a SORT cell extraction, when transporting an inmate with known mobility issues. Staff are directed to specifically consider whether allowing the inmate to use a previously prescribed disability device would be consistent with ensuring staff and inmate safety, and if not, whether use of another reasonably available mobility assistance equipment or device would be reasonably feasible under the circumstances. Reasonable accommodations must be made for prisoners with disabilities, unless such accommodation would pose or create a risk of injury to any person, or a threat to the security or order of the facility. In a non-emergency situation, custody staff shall consult with medical staff prior to any determination about removing or denying a medically prescribed device when moving an inmate into a safety cell or performing a SORT cell extraction. Staff are required to document the reasons for denial of a prescribed mobility device or other means of conveyance when moving an inmate into a safety cell or performing a SORT cell extraction. Staff shall be trained on the modified policies within six months of the issuance of the modified policies; if such training does not occur within that time period, the City shall notify plaintiff's counsel and the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.


Summaries of

Bell v. Williams

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Oct 18, 2022
18-cv-01245-SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2022)
Case details for

Bell v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:VINCENT KEITH BELL, Plaintiff, v. YVETTE WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Oct 18, 2022

Citations

18-cv-01245-SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2022)