UC Hastings and San Francisco Reach Deal in Tenderloin Lawsuit
The stipulated injunction filed with the court Friday, which still requires sign-off from San Francisco's Board of Supervisors and from U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar, who is overseeing the case, would require the city to remove up to 300 tents and encampments from the neighborhood's streets by July 20.
June 12, 2020 at 04:03 PM
4 minute read
Lawyers for a coalition of residents and businesses in the Tenderloin neighborhood of San Francisco, spearheaded by the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, filed court papers Friday indicating they'd reached an agreement to settle their lawsuit against the city and county over conditions in the neighborhood.
UC Hastings and the group, which includes a local resident confined to a wheelchair, a manager of a single-room-occupancy hotel, and the part-owner of a local cafe, filed a federal lawsuit last month claiming that local authorities allowed the Tenderloin to become "a containment zone" for drug and homelessness issues, a situation that has further deteriorated since the COVID-19 pandemic. The suit claimed that an influx of people living on Tenderloin streets has combined with the open-air drug sales in the neighborhood to make sidewalk conditions "insufferable."
The stipulated injunction filed with the court Friday, which still requires sign-off from San Francisco's Board of Supervisors and from U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar, who is overseeing the case, would require the city to remove up to 300 tents and encampments from the neighborhood's streets by July 20. The move would mark a 70% reduction from the count in a June 5 neighborhood census. Under the injunction, the city has agreed to relocate tent occupants to "shelter-in-place" hotel rooms, safe sleeping villages being established outside the Tenderloin, or off-street sites in the neighborhood, such as parking lots. The injunction also requires the city to enforce narcotics laws "consistently across the city."
"The City is hopeful that most people offered an alternative location will be willing to accept it, but if necessary to comply with this stipulated injunction the City will employ enforcement measures for those who do not accept an offer of shelter or safe sleeping sites to prevent re-encampment," the joint filing says.
Representatives of the mayor's office didn't immediately respond to a message seeking clarification about what enforcement measures might be used for those who refuse to relocate or attempt to return to the neighborhood streets.
Michael Kelly of Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger, a lawyer for the UC Hastings-led coalition, said that he and his colleagues spent a lot of time making sure that the rights of both the housed and unhoused in the neighborhood were being respected, but that the negotiations didn't go into the "granular detail" of how such situations will be handled.
"There's no part of what we're doing, we trust, that violates the statutory or constitutional rights of anyone," Kelly said.
Lauren Hansen of The Public Interest Law Project, who represents a group of homeless advocacy groups seeking to intervene in the lawsuit, noted that since the proposed deal doesn't yet have approval from the Board of Supervisors or the judge, it isn't "binding or final."
"We oppose any resolution that results in sweeps and the violation of the constitutional and statutory rights of unhoused persons," she said.
Under the terms of the deal outlined Friday, if either party believed the other to be in breach of the stipulated injunction, they can potentially raise disputes with U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, who has been overseeing settlement talks in the case. If Corley is unable to negotiate a resolution, the dispute would be routed to Tigar.
Read more:
San Francisco and UC Hastings to Talk Settlement in Lawsuit Over Tenderloin Conditions
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllState Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
3 minute readApple Disputes 'Efforts to Manufacture' Imaging Sensor Claims Against iPhone 15 Technology
Lawsuit alleges racial and gender discrimination led to an Air Force contractor's death at California airfield
7 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Ex-Kline & Specter Associate Drops Lawsuit Against the Firm
- 2Am Law 100 Lateral Partner Hiring Rose in 2024: Report
- 3The Importance of Federal Rule of Evidence 502 and Its Impact on Privilege
- 4What’s at Stake in Supreme Court Case Over Religious Charter School?
- 5People in the News—Jan. 30, 2025—Rubin Glickman, Goldberg Segalla
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250