San Diego Jury Awards McGaff Family $8.5 Million in MTS Bus Chokehold Death
Won by Gomez Trial Attorneys, Car Accident & Personal Injury Lawyers.
A San Diego County jury found the Metropolitan Transit System 40 percent at fault for the death of Anthony McGaff, who was held in a chokehold for more than eight minutes aboard a moving city bus.
What happened
On April 30, 2022, 28-year-old Anthony McGaff boarded a Metropolitan Transit System bus in downtown San Diego. A confrontation started after a woman on the bus began recording him. McGaff grabbed her phone and threw it, then reached for a second phone in her purse. Other riders moved in to stop him.
One passenger, Edward Hilbert, put McGaff in a chokehold and held it for more than eight minutes while lying on top of him. A second passenger pinned his legs. The bus kept moving, and the driver did not pull over or step in as the restraint continued. McGaff lost consciousness and later died at a hospital. Hilbert was charged in the death and pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter, which brought a sentence of two years of probation.
McGaff's family sued MTS, represented by Gomez Trial Attorneys. The case turned on what the transit agency and its driver owed passengers during a violent emergency on board. The family argued that the driver had time to stop the bus and respond while a rider was being choked for several minutes, and that MTS carried responsibility for the safety of the people in its care.
MTS contested its share of the blame, pointing to the passengers who carried out the restraint. The jury weighed the driver's choices against the actions of the riders who held McGaff down.
After trial in San Diego County Superior Court, the jury returned its verdict on November 7, 2025. It awarded the family $8.5 million and placed 40 percent of the fault on MTS, with the remaining 60 percent split among three passengers who took part in the restraint.
"This is what I've always wanted," McGaff's mother said after the verdict. "It's justice for my son and he deserved it."
The award stood as returned by the jury, with no reduction reported in the coverage that followed the trial.
Sources
This account is drawn from contemporaneous public reporting and the court record.