Woodruff v. Ragazzoni et al

On October 16, 2025, in Los Angeles, California, plaintiff John Woodruff was involved in an altercation with defendants Michael Ragazzoni and Sarah Jenkins outside a downtown restaurant. Woodruff alleged that Ragazzoni and Jenkins physically attacked him without provocation, causing severe injuries including a fractured orbital bone and multiple lacerations. Woodruff filed a civil lawsuit seeking damages for assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The defendants asserted a self-defense claim, arguing that Woodruff initiated the confrontation with threats and a shove. Surveillance footage partially captured the incident, leading to conflicting interpretations at trial. The case centered on whether the defendants’ response was proportionate.

After a nine-day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, finding the defendants liable for assault and battery. Woodruff was awarded $1.8 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages. A related criminal investigation by the District Attorney’s office resulted in no charges against the defendants due to insufficient evidence of criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

The central dispute was whether the defendants’ actions constituted lawful self-defense or an excessive and retaliatory use of force, and to what extent the plaintiff’s own conduct contributed to the altercation.

The verdict ignited debate over the differing standards of proof in civil versus criminal assault cases. Advocacy groups called for clearer statutory guidance on self-defense jury instructions in California civil trials. The case also prompted several law schools to host symposia examining the intersection of tort law and self-defense claims.