Mendez v. City of Chicago

Decision Date26 September 2022
Docket Number18-cv-6313
PartiesJUAN MENDEZ, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, CHRISTIAN SZCZUR, and DAVID COOK, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

MARVIN E. ASPEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Juan Mendez has brought Fourth Amendment claims and related state law claims against two Chicago police officers-Christian Szczur and David Cook (collectively the Officers)-and the City of Chicago (“the City”). Defendants move for summary judgment on Mendez's claims for excessive force, battery indemnification, liability based on respondeat superior, liability under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), and unconstitutional search with respect to the Officers' entry onto the property where Mendez resided. (Defendants' Joint Motion for Summary Judgment (“Defs.' Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 208) Defendants' Joint Memorandum in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment (“Defs.' Mem.”) (Dkt No. 210).)[1] Mendez cross-moves for summary judgment on his unconstitutional search claim. (Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“Pl.'s Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 211); Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“Pl.'s Mem.”) (Dkt. No. 213).) For the following reasons, Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part, and Mendez's motion is denied in its entirety.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

We take the following facts from the parties' Local Rule 56.1 submissions,[2] the materials cited therein, and other aspects of the record in this case. All facts are genuinely undisputed unless otherwise noted.[3] The relevant events occurred on May 26, 2018. At this time, Mendez was 33 years old and lived in a building (the “Building”) located at 5239 West Ohio Street in Chicago, Illinois (the “Property”). (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶¶ 5, 8; Transcript of Juan Mendez's Deposition (“Mendez Dep.”) (Dkt. No. 209-2) at 24:19-22.) Below is a front view of the Building and the Property as of May 26, 2018:

IMAGE OMITTED

(Declaration of Filiberto Mendez-Anglada (“Mendez-Anglada Decl.”) (Dkt. No. 209-4) ¶ 10 & Ex. A.)

The Property had a front yard, which was enclosed by a short wrought-iron fence that people could see through and over. (Id. ¶¶ 8, 10, & Ex. A; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 14.) The fence had a gate, but the gate was not locked and could be opened without a key. (Mendez-Anglada Decl. ¶ 9 & Ex. A; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 14.) The Building had a front door, a porch off the front door, and steps leading up to the front porch. (Mendez-Anglada Decl. ¶ 10 & Ex. A.) Inside, the Building consisted of one apartment unit on the first floor and another apartment unit on the second floor. (Id. ¶ 4.) Both units had access to the front porch and front yard. (Id. ¶ 7.)

In May 2018, the Building's owner rented out both units. (Id. ¶¶ 3, 5.) Members of Mendez's family lived in both units: Mendez lived in the second-floor unit with his father, his father's wife, and a brother; Mendez's half-brother, Juan Mendez, Jr., lived in the first-floor unit with his wife and children. (Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 17; Mendez Dep. at 24:13-27:6; Transcript of Juan Mendez, Jr.'s Deposition (“Mendez Jr. Dep.”) (Dkt. No. 212-13) at 16:11-13, 17:22-18:6.) Mendez's name was not on the lease. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 9.) The members of Mendez's family who lived in the Building left the doors to both units unlocked, and they could freely access both units. (Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶¶ 17, 18; Mendez, Jr. Dep. at 31:10-32:6, 99:24-100:20.) The entire family also used the front yard and front porch. (Mendez, Jr. Dep. at 35:9-12, 37:17-24.) Mendez, Jr. testified that the front gate was always closed shut. (Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 19.) Mendez, Jr. further testified that he considered the front yard private property for his family's exclusive use and that he would call the police if he saw someone loitering in the front yard. (Id. ¶¶ 20, 21; Mendez, Jr. Dep. at 102:6-8, 102:18-103:3, 104:23-105:2.)

Even so, visitors would walk up the stairs to the porch and either call out for the person they were visiting or knock on the front door. (Mendez, Jr. Dep. at 90:10-91:5.) Delivery persons also left packages for members of the Mendez family on the front porch. (Id. at 33:20-34:6, 90:6-9.)

In the early morning hours of May 26, 2018, Mendez discharged a handgun outside the Building. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 15; Mendez Dep. at 64:13-65:13, 177:24-178:6.) The Chicago Police Department's (“CPD”) ShotSpotter technology[4] detected the gunfire, and the Office of Emergency Management and Communications broadcast over zone radio that a shot had been fired in the area of 5235 West Ohio Street. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶¶ 16-18, 23.) Chicago police officers are aware that a ShotSpotter alert covers an area of “82 feet from the epicenter, which means that the gunfire could have originated up to two houses away on either side of a designated location.” (Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s ASOF ¶ 100.)

Szczur and Cook were Chicago police officers assigned to the CPD's 015 District. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶¶ 6, 21.) The 015 District, which is located on Chicago's west side in the Austin neighborhood, is known for high gang activity. (Id. ¶¶ 10, 11.) While patrolling the district, Szczur, Cook, and two other police officers heard the radio dispatch of a shot fired in the vicinity of 5235 West Ohio Street. (Id. ¶¶ 21, 23.) The officers responded and arrived in the area of that address approximately two minutes after the dispatch. (Id. ¶¶ 23, 24; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 6.) Each officer was dressed in full police uniform, with a vest labeled “POLICE”; had his police star displayed and visible on his uniform; and was equipped with a body-worn camera. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 22; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 7.) At all relevant times, Szczur and Cook were acting within their scope of employment and under color of law. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 6.)

When the officers arrived at the scene, Mendez was sitting on the Building's front porch, and a juvenile was sitting on the porch steps. (Id. ¶ 27; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOAF ¶ 79.) Mendez and the juvenile were the only individuals other than police officers that Szczur and Cook saw outside in the area. (Transcript of Christian Szczur's Deposition (“Szczur Dep.”) (Dkt. No. 209-6) at 117:18-118:4, 119:5-17; Transcript of David Cook's Deposition (“Cook Dep.”) (Dkt. No. 209-7) at 116:8-20, 141:20-142:6.) While sitting on the porch, Mendez's handgun was tucked into the right side of his waistband, near his right buttock. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 66; Mendez Dep. at 94:6-12.)

After arriving at the scene, the officers exited their vehicle. (Statement of David Cook to the Civilian Office of Police Accountability (“Cook COPA Statement”) (Dkt. No. 212-14) at 16:1-7.) Cook noticed two individuals-Mendez and the juvenile-and made his way to the Property, which is two lots west of 5235 West Ohio Street. (Id. at 16:1-11; Cook Dep. at 116:8- 10; Szczur Dep. at 75:17-21.) Cook then stood on the sidewalk in front of the Property's fence gate and began talking to Mendez and the juvenile. (Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 32; Cook COPA Statement at 16:7-18; Cook Dep. at 117:17-23; Cook Video at 0:00-0:10; Szczur Video at 1:08-1:22.)[5] A short time later, Szczur, who had been investigating the front yard of 5235 West Ohio Street, walked to the Property. (Szczur Video at 0:19-1:22.) Mendez recognized Cook and Szczur to be Chicago police officers. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 65; Mendez Dep. at 94:13- 95:3.)

Upon arriving at the Property, Szczur asked “you guys don't have anything on you you're not supposed to have, right?,” pushed the gate open, told Mendez and the juvenile to stand up, and entered the front yard. (Szczur Video at 1:23-1:27; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶¶ 29, 30; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 38; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOAF ¶ 101.) Mendez did not verbally respond to Szczur's question or immediately stand up. (Szczur Video at 1:24-1:30; Cook Video at 0:11-0:20; Mendez Dep. at 96:14-97:1.) Szczur then approached the front porch stairs and instructed the juvenile to walk to Cook, who had entered the yard behind Szczur. (Szczur Video at 1:27-1:31; Cook Video at 0:14-0:20; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOAF ¶ 101.) After the juvenile complied with Szczur's instructions, Cook began to pat him down. (Cook Video at 0:16-0:23; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 34; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOF ¶ 43.) Meanwhile, Szczur began walking up the porch stairs. (Szczur Video at 1:30-1:36; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 35.) Mendez stood up, but once Szczur got closer, Mendez jumped off the porch before Szczur could come “to touch and grab” him. (Szczur Video at 1:34-1:37; Cook Video at 0:20-0:23; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 35; Mendez Dep. at 97:8-17.) After landing in the adjoining yard, Mendez crossed the yard, jumped over a fence, and began running down a nearby alley. (Szczur Video at 1:37-1:38; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 35; Mendez Dep. at 98:21-99:6, 99:11-100:13, 101:9-102:5.) Mendez's gun was in his waistband when he jumped off the porch and began running down the alley. (Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶¶ 66, 67; Mendez Dep. at 103:1-11.)

Szczur and Cook gave chase. (Szczur Video at 1:37-1:43; Cook Video at 0:21-0:29; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' SOF ¶ 37.) Just before he entered the alley, Szczur yelled “Put your fucking hands up,” “I'll shoot you,” “I'll fucking shoot you.” (Szczur Video at 1:42-1:45.) At this point, Szczur had not yet observed a gun in Mendez's hands. (Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s SOAF ¶ 97.) After entering the alley, Cook who was ahead of Szczur, yelled “Waistband,” “Waistband,” “Waistband,” “Get your hands up,” and “Hands up” in quick succession. ...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT