Primary Area(s) of Practice

• General Liability
• Civil Rights & Police Litigation Defense Task Force
• National Trial Practice
• Appellate

Additional Experience

• Crisis Management Practice

Associations

Los Angeles Chapter’s ABOTA Side Bar program

Awards & Honors

• 2019 Top Litigator and Trial Attorney – Los Angeles Business Journal
• Super Lawyers Rising Star 2013-2017
• Best Advocate in California award — Scott Moot Court Board (competitive appellate advocacy)

Professional Presentations

Education

Loyola Law School, Loyola Marymount University

Juris Doctor, 2007

Princeton University

Bachelor of Arts, Public & International Affairs (Mgmt), 1993

Representative Matters

• Mr. Sain and his team won a defense-favorable verdict for the Riverside County Sheriff and Sheriff’s Department in a federal civil rights jury trial arising from allegations of excessive force and wrongful death associated with prone restraint of a methamphetamine-intoxicated subject, where plaintiff alleged death by restraint/positional asphyxia in the spirit of George Floyd.  After a two week trial against some of the nation’s top police/civil rights plaintiffs’ attorneys, the jury unanimously found that the deputies’ handcuffed prone restraint was reasonable/lawful.
• Mr. Sain and his team won a groundbreaking appeal before the Ninth Circuit clarifying that a suspect has no right to Brady disclosures of exculpatory evidence before a criminal proceeding where such evidence could be used, unless the investigators conceal such evidence from the prosecutors – which was not the case in the appeal at issue.
• Mr. Sain and his team won an overwhelming defense verdict for the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department in a state civil rights jury trial involving allegations of excessive force arising from an officer-involved shooting of a knife-armed subject.  After a six-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants: one of the first pro-police verdicts after the anti-police demonstrations of 2020.
• Mr. Sain and his team won a unanimous defense verdict for the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department in a federal civil rights jury trial involving allegations of excessive force arising from a police canine/K9 bite. After a five-day trial and less than 90 minutes of deliberations, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants.  When the district court later amended the defense judgment into a judgment for plaintiff, Mr. Sain and his team successfully restored the defense judgment by a reversal on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
• Mr. Sain and his team obtained an appellate victory when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of a civil rights case involving an alleged Fourth Amendment violation, concluding that the suit was time-barred. The court also affirmed judgment on the pleadings in favor of the defendants in the same action alleging that the plaintiff was falsely arrested and maliciously prosecuted. The case established new precedent that: (1) California Code sec. 356 does not toll the statute of limitations while a criminal appeal is pending; and (2) a reversal on appeal does not necessarily support a malicious prosecution cause of action.
• Mr. Sain and his team secured a win for the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department against claims of negligence, excessive force, and wrongful death in an officer-involved shooting case - where a knife-armed teen charged a pair of deputies trying to help him. During the six-day trial, the defense team established that the defendant deputies had reasonably followed their training. The jury ultimately rendered a unanimous defense verdict after three hours of deliberations.
• Mr. Sain and his team secured the affirmance of summary judgment in favor of the City of Gardena when a California appeals court held that the promulgation provision of Vehicle Code § 17004.7, which provides immunity for public entities that adopt and implement appropriate vehicle pursuit policies, “does not require proof of compliance by every officer with the written certification requirement as a prerequisite to immunity.” The California Supreme Court subsequently adopted this ruling, emphasizing that immunity depends upon agency compliance with the statute, not officer completion of the certification mandate.
• Mr. Sain and his team obtained a unanimous defense verdict against a high-profile plaintiff’s attorney in a matter where the plaintiff became paralyzed from the waist down after an encounter with the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department involving a TASER.
• Mr. Sain and his team secured a win for two Manhattan Beach officers in a case alleging excessive force that ended in a mysterious fatality. The decedent incurred a skull fracture of unknown origin during a pursuit following a traffic stop. Plaintiffs’ counsel made a damages demand of eight figures. Following a week-long trial, with jury deliberations split over two days, the jury rendered a complete defense verdict for both officers.
• On behalf of a California government entity, Mr. Sain and his team secured the denial of a petition filed pursuant to the California Public Records Act (CPRA) following the death of a suspect in police custody. Citing to provisions that temporarily exempted from disclosure the police investigatory materials that the plaintiffs sought, the defense team assembled clear and convincing evidence that justified the client’s withholding of records. The court also denied the plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees.
• In a case that may serve as a bellwether in the ongoing debate over the scope of disclosable public records under the 2019+ revisions to the California Public Records Act (CPRA), and the applicable definition of ‘great bodily injury’ (GBI), Mr. Sain and his team secured a denial of a writ petition seeking disclosure of investigative records of a TASER-related incident with standard associated injuries, where death was determined to have been caused by narcotics, not TASER usage.
• Mr. Sain and his team successfully convinced the plaintiff to dismiss her case with prejudice for zero dollars and to assign a full release of claims in a matter involving wrongful death and excessive force claims against police officers regarding an officer-involved shooting of a golf-club-armed suspect. After successfully convincing the court to dismiss the wrongful death claim for lack of standing, the defense team prepared a persuasive motion for summary judgment on the excessive force claim, which ultimately prompted the plaintiff to stipulate to the dismissal of the matter.
• Mr. Sain and his team inspired plaintiffs to dismiss their case with prejudice for zero dollars where plaintiffs’ decedent had run away from a vehicle stop, then grappled against a uniformed deputy, before shooting the deputy twice: prompting the deputy to engage in a self-defensive officer-involved shooting.

Publications

Media Coverage