Case: Hillard v. City of Antioch

This case concerns allegations that the City of Antioch’s police department had engaged in excessive force, falsified records, committed illegal searches, and shared racist and sexist texts. 

On December 21, 2023, the Plaintiffs, seven California residents, filed this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The Plaintiffs brought this action against the City of Antioch, California under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 1983, and 1985, alleging widespread misconduct and abuse by members of the Antioch Police Department. In their complaint, Plaintiffs claimed that officers subjected them to excessive force, illegally searched and seized their belongings, and engaged in a pattern and practice of discriminatory law enforcement based on race and gender. They further alleged that the officers sent hundreds of racist, sexist, and homophobic text messages, and bragged about using excessive force. Plaintiffs brought five causes of action: (1) unreasonable searches and seizures in violation of the fourth amendment; (2) repeated practice of condoning and tacitly encouraging the abuse of police authority; (3) conspiracy to violate Plaintiff’s civil rights; (4) pattern and practice of discriminatory conduct towards minority communities, and; (5) malicious prosecution. Represented by private counsel, the Plaintiffs sought compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees and costs. They also sought special damages including past, present, and future wage loss, income and support, and medical damages. The case was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim and was reassigned to District Judge William H. Orrick. 

The Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on December 28, 2023, adding another officer as a defendant. The amended complaint also provided more details about the force used, alleging that an officer shot one of the Plaintiffs multiple times using rubber bullets.  

The case was reassigned to District Judge Vince Chhabria on January 11, 2024. On January 12, 2024, the court consolidated the case with Allen v. City of Antioch (23-cv-01895-VC), a class action lawsuit against the City that similarly alleged civil rights violations by Antioch police officers. 

On February 2, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The complaint reflected the consolidation with Allen v. City of Antioch (23-cv-01895-VC) and Robinson v. City of Antioch (23-cv-03773-SI), bringing the total to 22 individuals alleging civil rights violations and misconduct by the Antioch Police Department. 

The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler for a settlement conference on February 16, 2024. 

On February 22, 2024, the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the claims against Defendant Deven Wenger, which the court granted on April 30, 2024. The allegations were insufficient to support a claim against Wenger because the complaint only alleged that Wenger received the text messages and did not report the messages or the conduct described in them. 

The Plaintiffs filed another amended complaint on May 13, 2024. The amended complaint added four current and former Antioch City Managers and two police sergeants as defendants. On May 23, 2024, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order, agreeing that defendants who answered the earlier consolidated complaint did not need to respond to the pending or future amended complaints until pleading issues were resolved with defendants who hadn’t answered. District Judge Vince Chhabria granted the stipulation on May 24, 2024. That same day, Defendant Deven Wenger filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the complaint failed to allege facts sufficient to state a claim against him. 

On May 30, 2024, the parties filed another stipulation and proposed order, which the court granted on June 3, 2024. In their stipulation, the parties agreed to dismiss the claims and causes of action against Defendant Andrea Rodriguez as to three of the Plaintiffs. 

The court held a settlement conference on June 26, 2024. According to the court order memorializing the next steps in the settlement process, the Plaintiffs were divided into three categories based on the nature of their claims: (1) warrants with no use of force; (2) use of force without Monell claims; and (3) Monell claims. The court ordered the Plaintiffs to make concrete money demands between the middle and end of July for all categories, starting with the first category.

The court consolidated the case with another related case, Pugh v. City of Antioch (24-cv-01774-VC), on June 28, 2024. 

 Defendant Andrea Rodriguez filed a motion to dismiss on July 12, 2024, and Defendant Morteza Amiri filed a motion to dismiss on July 19, 2024. Both Defendants argued that the complaint did not have sufficient non-conclusory factual allegations. 

On August 5, 2024, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order agreeing to dismiss the claims against Defendant Prieto as to one of the Plaintiffs. The court granted the stipulation on August 9, 2024. 

The Plaintiffs filed a second amended consolidated complaint that added an additional Plaintiff on September 3, 2024. Additionally, the complaint added more specific factual allegations against the Defendants. 

The court granted in part and denied in part the Defendant Wenger’s motion to dismiss on September 9, 2024. The court dismissed two of the Plaintiffs’ claims for malicious prosecution and racial bias with leave to amend. Further, the court denied the motion to dismiss the claims for conspiracy to violate civil rights and unreasonable seizure. On the same day, District Judge Vince Chhabria resolved Defendants Wenger, Rodriguez, and Amiri’s motions to dismiss as a result of the Plaintiff’s second amended complaint. 

On September 12, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a third amended consolidated complaint, adding new causes of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for privacy violations and removing one of the Plaintiffs. Additionally, the case consolidation information was updated to reflect the lawsuit’s consolidation with Pugh v. City of Antioch (24-cv-01774-VC). 

The parties stipulated to dismiss one of the Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Andrea Rodriguez on September 25, 2024, which the court granted on September 26, 2024. 

Defendants Wenger filed another motion to dismiss on September 25, 2024, which was granted in part and denied in part on November 8, 2024. The court dismissed two of the Plaintiffs’ malicious prosecution claims due the prior September 9 order dismissing the claims with leave to amend and the Plaintiff’s lack of new allegations. Further, the court denied the motion to dismiss as to the claims alleging violations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and right to privacy. According to the court, the Plaintiffs made sufficient allegations of racial animus because Wenger’s texts raised inferences of racial bias. Further, the allegations that an officer attacked one of the Plaintiffs with his K9 dog, took photos of the Plaintiff’s injuries, and distributed the photos to other officers were sufficient to allege a constitutional violation of privacy. 

The Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended complaint on February 3, 2025. The complaint identified 25 previously anonymous officers and added them to the list of named defendants. The Plaintiffs also identified specific officers by name in factual allegations that had previously referred to “Doe” officers. Additionally, the complaint included more detailed factual allegations regarding the conduct and oversight of the Antioch Police Department. 

On February 18, 2025, the parties stipulated to dismiss two of the Plaintiff’s claims as a result of the parties' settlement terms for those two Plaintiffs. The court granted the stipulation that same day. 

Two more Plaintiffs settled on February 20, 2025. As a result, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order to dismiss the two Plaintiff’s claims, which the court granted on February 24, 2025. 

On March 25, 2025, Defendants Brayton Milner and  James Stenger filed motions to dismiss the fourth consolidated complaint. That same day, the court held settlement conferences for four of the Plaintiffs and settlements for three of the Plaintiffs were put on record. 

On March 31, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment against Defendant Rombough and Doe Defendant Officers on the excessive force, discriminatory enforcement, and conspiracy claims. They argued that Defendant Rombough’s guilty plea to federal civil rights violations under 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights) and § 242 (Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law) and admissions established liability. The motion relied on undisputed facts that Defendant Rombough admitted to kicking one of the Plaintiffs in the head during his arrest. He further admitted that he and other officers authored police reports containing false or misleading statements and exchanged racially derogatory texts. 

Defendant Milners withdrew his motion to dismiss the fourth amended consolidated complaint on April 3, 2025.

On April 4, 2025, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order. In the stipulation, the parties agreed that the Defendants would not oppose the Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment against Defendant Rombough and Doe Defendant Officers. The parties also agreed that the Plaintiff who was subject to excessive force by Defendant Rombough did not release his claim for injunctive relief against the City of Antioch. The court granted the stipulation on April 7, 2025. 

The court granted the parties’ stipulation to dismiss Defendant Daniel Harris as a result of his settlement with one of the Plaintiffs on April 9, 2025. 

On May 30, 2025, the parties stipulated to dismiss Defendant Gustavo Jimenez as a result of the settlement of claims against him. The court granted the stipulation on June 2, 2025.

 The parties came to settlement terms regarding individual Defendant Officers and on September 10, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed a voluntary dismissal of the named Defendants. District Judge Vince Chhabria granted the dismissal on September 12, 2025. 

The parties finalized all material terms of the final settlement agreement for the Monell claims on September 18, 2025. The court gave the Defendants two weeks to edit the settlement, obtain final approval by the City, and provide the Plaintiffs with information about the information that they needed to evaluate the fees request. 

On February 6, 2026, the settlement agreement was finalized. As of February 9, 2026, the settlement agreement has not been filed with the court. The next hearing is set for March 19, 2026.

This case is ongoing.