Today, the San Diego Board of Supervisors approved a comprehensive settlement agreement to resolve Plaintiffs’ Second Claim for Relief in Dunsmore et al. v. San Diego County Sheriff’s Department et al., No. 3:20-cv-00406-AJB-DDL, a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the County of San Diego, San Diego County Sheriff’s Office, and San Diego County Probation Department over unconstitutional and unlawful conditions at the San Diego County Jail facilities. The Second Claim for Relief addresses Defendants’ failure to provide constitutionally adequate mental health care to the Dunsmore class under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Sections 7 and 17 of the California Constitution.

After months of extensive negotiation, the Sheriff’s Office has agreed to significant changes to policies, procedures, and practices that will improve mental health care in the jails. The proposed settlement requires the establishment of clinical levels of care, expansion of the County’s mental health beds and staffing, and mental health pre-clearance in the County’s solitary confinement units. The proposed settlement will be submitted to the Court for preliminary approval within 30 days.

“This agreement is a tremendous step forward for our clients, and provides much-needed relief for vulnerable class members on some of the most important issues in this case. We are grateful to Magistrate Judge David Leshner for the many hours he devoted to working with the parties to achieve this excellent resolution. The settlement demonstrates the dedication of Sheriff Martinez and the Board of Supervisors to improving the mental health care system at the Jail, which will increase the well-being of class members both now and in the future. We look forward to working with the Sheriff’s Office and the independent neutral to ensure expeditious and effective implementation of all terms of the agreement,” said Gay Grunfeld, a partner of Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld LLP and counsel for the Plaintiffs and the certified class. The Plaintiffs and the class are also represented by Aaron Fischer of the Law Office of Aaron J. Fischer and Christopher Young of DLA Piper LLP (US) (“Class Counsel”).

“I have observed the terrible outcomes and suffering of our clients in San Diego County Jail for nearly a decade now. With this agreement, I can finally say that the jail system’s leadership is committed to addressing what have been serious, longstanding problems,” said Aaron Fischer, who also worked on the 2018 Disability Rights California investigation report Suicides in San Diego County Jail: A System Failing People with Mental Illness. “As this agreement is fully implemented, our clients should expect to receive timely mental health care in appropriate clinical settings. They should expect a significant shift away from harmful isolation conditions, and a move towards meaningful treatment that supports their well-being and successful reentry.”

“DLA Piper is proud to be a part of this agreement, which will save lives and make our community safer while promoting rehabilitation and reentry for the Dunsmore class,” said Christopher Young, a partner of DLA Piper in San Diego.

Background

Originally filed by named plaintiff Darryl Dunsmore in 2020, the lawsuit became a class action in 2022. Its filing coincided with the issuance of an unprecedented California State Auditor report titled “San Diego County Sheriff ’s Department It Has Failed to Adequately Prevent and Respond to the Deaths of Individuals in Its Custody,” which observed numerous deficiencies in the provision of mental health care at the jail facilities. The Third Amended Complaint includes eight claims for class relief. In October 2023, the Court granted certification of the class and subclasses. The parties previously settled Plaintiffs’ claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and related state law on December 11, 2024. The Court granted final approval of the ADA settlement on August 4, 2025. Six other claims in the case remain ongoing and in active litigation after the Court denied the County’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on August 11, 2025. The Court has set a pre-trial conference in the case for May 21, 2026. Any claim not settled by then will proceed to trial.

Summary of Terms

The Joint Motion and Order re: Mental Health Issues and Resolving Second Claim for Relief is here. It addresses the entirety of Plaintiffs’ mental health-related claims and provides relief for the entire class, consisting of thousands of individuals on any given day. The proposed settlement agreement is the product of months of negotiations between Class Counsel and the County under the auspices of Magistrate Judge David Leshner. If approved by the District Judge Anthony J. Battaglia, the settlement agreement will lead to changes across all of the Jail system’s seven facilities, with oversight by an independent neutral and continued involvement of Class Counsel. Key provisions include:

• Significant changes to policies and procedures improving mental health care on a systemic level: The settlement agreement provides improvements to the Sheriff’s Office’s mental health care policies from the moment a person enters the Jail to the moment they leave, with provisions for medication verification and psychiatric scheduling at intake, confidential and timely care throughout, and ensuring proper linkages with community providers and medication supply upon discharge.
• Establishment of clinical levels of care: The settlement agreement requires a qualified mental health professional to assign levels of care at intake, including Safety Cell, Enhanced Observation Housing (“EOH”), Psychiatric Stabilization Unit (“PSU”), Outpatient Step Down (“OPSD”), and Outpatient (“OP”). The levels of care provide appropriate treatment plans and programming needs based on a class member’s mental health needs.
• Pre–clearance in solitary confinement units: The agreement includes reforms to the Jail’s Administrative Separation units, requiring a qualified mental health professional to evaluate and recommend alternative placement if solitary confinement is contraindicated for an individual. It prohibits class members from being placed in solitary confinement on the basis of mental illness. It requires referral to a qualified mental health professional for removal from solitary confinement if an individual is suspected to be decompensating. The agreement also guarantees access to tablets, which will reduce the harmful effects of solitary confinement.
• Expanded OPSD program: To further reduce the use of solitary confinement, the settlement agreement requires expansion of dedicated mental health housing called OPSD. The County has committed to adding a significant number of OPSD beds at Las Colinas Detention and Reentry Facility and at its newly renovated Rock Mountain Detention Facility. This expansion has already begun and will continue through March 2027. The agreement also requires the County to develop a bed and staffing plan based on a systemwide needs assessment to meet the needs of the mental health population at each level of care.
• Robust accountability mechanisms: The proposed settlement agreement includes provisions for review of the County’s healthcare contracts, key mental health processes and sentinel events, including in-custody deaths and other emergency events. The agreement also requires the County to implement real-time training for both mental health and custody staff, including additional de-escalation and suicide prevention training.
• Appointment of neutral expert: The agreement requires the appointment of an neutral expert to report twice yearly on the County’s implementation of the agreement based on inspection of the facilities, interviews with staff and class members, as well as access to and review of the County’s policies and documentation.
• Class Counsel participation: The agreement provides for the continued involvement of Class Counsel, including through regular interviews at the facilities with class members, accompanying the independent neutral on their inspection of the facilities, and access to documents.

#   #   #

Media Contacts