Noble v. Sheahan, 99 C 8455.
Decision Date | 09 February 2001 |
Docket Number | No. 99 C 8455.,99 C 8455. |
Citation | 132 F.Supp.2d 626 |
Parties | Randall A. NOBLE, Plaintiff, v. Michael SHEAHAN, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, and Cook County Sheriff's Department, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Charmaine Elizabeth Dwyer, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff.
Gina Elizabeth Brock, Regina Worley Calabro, Thomas Vincent Lyons, Helen J. Kim, Cook County State's Attorney, Maureen P. Feerick, Cook County State's Attorney's Office, Chicago, IL, for Defendants.
Plaintiff Randall A. Noble sues Defendants Michael Sheahan and the Cook County Sheriff's Department for racial discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Noble alleges that Defendants discriminated against him because he is African-American and retaliated against him for filing a charge of discrimination with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). Currently before this Court is Defendants' motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Plaintiff Randall Noble has been employed by the Cook County Sheriff's Department as a deputy sheriff in the Court Services Department since July 1988. On September 7, 1995, Noble filed a charge of discrimination with the IDHR, alleging that the Cook County Sheriff's Department discriminated against him on the basis of race when he was "suspended for three weeks without pay" in September 1995.2 (R. 37-2, Pl.'s Statement of Fact ¶ 7.) Noble amended his charge on September 28, 1995, March 21, 1996, and May 20, 1996, alleging that: (1) he had been denied a uniform check in retaliation for having filed the original charge of discrimination; (2) he had been subjected to unequal work conditions on February 7, 1996 when he lost two vacation days as a result of his absences on November 20 and 22, 1995, while a white officer, who was absent for the same reason, did not lose vacation days; (3) he had been suspended in April 1996 in retaliation for filing the charge of discrimination; and (4) he had been discriminated against on the basis of race in April 1996 when he was suspended for not reporting to work on time. (Id. .)
In March, September, and November of 1998, the Sheriff of Cook County responded to the IDHR's requests for additional information regarding Noble's charge of discrimination. (Id. at ¶¶ 15-17.) On July 16, 1999, the IDHR concluded its investigation and issued a Notice of Substantial Evidence and Notice of Dismissal and Investigation Report. The IDHR concluded that there was "substantial evidence" to support Noble's allegation that he was discriminated against on the basis of his race when the Sheriff's Department denied him a uniform allowance. (Id.) The IDHR, however, found a lack of substantial evidence to support Noble's other allegations. (Id.) On September 16, 1999, the IDHR filed a complaint on behalf of Noble with the Human Rights Commission. (Id. at ¶ 16.)
On August 13, 1999, two days after Noble was informed that Defendants had suspended him without pay pending Merit Board action for allegedly violating various general orders of the Cook County Sheriff's Department, Noble filed a second charge of discrimination alleging that Defendants discriminated and retaliated against him on the basis of race for filing his September 1995 charge of discrimination and for participating in the investigation of that charge. (Id. at ¶¶ 4, 14-15.) The EEOC issued a Notice of Right to Sue with regard to Noble's August 13, 1999 charge of discrimination, and Noble filed the instant lawsuit. (Id. at ¶ 17.)
Defendants allege that, beginning in 1998, Noble violated various general orders of the Cook County Sheriff's Department. (Id. at ¶ 4.) In early to mid 1998, Noble applied for a part-time security position at Club Paradise, a nightclub/restaurant that Charles Miceli claimed he was opening in September 1998. (R. 37-2, Pl.'s Statement of Facts ¶¶ 22, 23.) Noble contends that he was not hired for this position and that he "never worked for Miceli in any capacity." (Id. at ¶ 23 (citing July 12, 2000 Noble Dep. at 64-65).) Defendants respond that, despite not being hired for the nightclub/restaurant, Noble subsequently worked for Miceli as a bodyguard.
In July 1998, Miceli traveled to Florida purportedly to check on his children who had been injured when someone threw a brick through the window of his ex-wife's house in Florida. (R. 37-2, Pl.'s Statement of Facts ¶ 26.) Miceli claimed that his ex-business partner, Marvin Cruz, was responsible for the incident. (Id.) Noble and Michael Mostacci, who was employed as Miceli's Director of Operations for Club Paradise, went to Florida at the same time, though Noble denies that he went as an employee of Miceli. (Id. at ¶¶ 24-26.) According to Noble, he "agreed to go on the trip to Florida because he was under stress at work and needed to get away." (Id. at ¶ 26 (citing Dec. 17, 1998 Noble Dep. at 378).)
Later that month, Miceli claimed that his father had been murdered in New York, and asked Mostacci to go to New York with him to make arrangements to retrieve the body. Noble, along with several other deputy sheriffs who were allegedly employed by Miceli, also went to New York. (Id. at ¶ 27.) On their return, Miceli asked Mostacci to pay for the airline tickets, which he did using his American Express card. (Id.) According to Mostacci, Miceli kept the receipts for the purpose of later reimbursing Mostacci. (Id.) Instead, according to Mostacci, Miceli obtained an additional card on Mostacci's account, without his authorization, and charged over $31,000. (Id.) Defendants contend that Mostacci authorized Miceli to use his credit card, and that the written authorization was witnessed by Noble. In August 1998, Mostacci filed a complaint against Miceli for credit card fraud. (Id.) Detective David Lambert of the Cook County Sheriff's Department took Mostacci's statement, and began an investigation into the alleged fraud by Miceli. (R. 37-2, Pl.'s Statement of Facts ¶¶ 28-29.) The scope of Lambert's investigation ultimately expanded to include allegations that Miceli issued and deposited back checks and stole money from Mostacci's mother. (Id. at ¶ 29.)
B. Investigations into Noble's Alleged Misconduct
On August 2, 1998, Sergeant Walter Hackl and Investigator Luke Ballo of the Cook County Sheriff's Department met with Miceli, who informed them that he was "seeking internal affairs protection because there was a plot to kill him." (Id. at ¶ 33.) At that time, Miceli also told Hackl and Ballo of a plot to have Cruz "hit," and explained that several deputy sheriffs, including Noble, were involved in this alleged plot. (Id.) Based on Miceli's allegations, Hackl commenced an investigation. .)3 Miceli purportedly told Hackl that: (1) Noble had been employed by Miceli to work as a bodyguard and was now threatening to kill him; (2) Noble had acted as Miceli's bodyguard on trips to Florida and New York in July 1998; (3) Noble had represented to the airlines that he was flying on official business so that he could carry a firearm on the plane; and (4) Noble had provided Miceli with Marvin Cruz's criminal history sheet and written a note to Miceli offering to eliminate Cruz for $20,000. (Id. at ¶ 19.) Noble denies that he engaged in any such conduct, , but does not deny that Miceli made these statements to Hackl or that Hackl relayed these statements to Swaine. ) .)
The Office of the Inspector General of the Cook County Sheriff's Department assigned Thomas Swaine to investigate these allegations. .) The steps Swaine took in conducting investigation No. 98-08-001 included: (1) obtaining documents from airlines and hotels in an effort to confirm that Miceli and Noble traveled together and that Noble carried a firearm; (2) interviewing Detective Lambert, who was investigating Miceli for theft, regarding conversations he had with Noble and other witnesses; (3) interviewing Noble and the other deputy sheriffs under investigation; (4) interviewing Marvin Cruz; (5) obtaining Noble's time sheets which revealed that he took vacation days on the dates of the trips reported by Miceli; (6) obtaining copies of Cruz's criminal history sheet; (7) attempting to obtain originals of the documents described above; and (8) submitting the documents to a handwriting analyst. (Id. at ¶ 20.) In October 1998, at the conclusion of this investigation, Swaine sustained six allegations against Noble, including that: (1) Noble engaged in unauthorized secondary employment; (2) Noble provided personal protection without a license; (3) Noble carried a firearm on an aircraft without authorization; and (4) Noble abused sick time. (Id. at ¶ 21.) Swaine recommended a twenty-nine day suspension. (Id., Ex. Q, October 6, 1998 Summary Report of Complaint Investigation 98-08-001 at 33.)
Noble does not dispute that Swaine sustained six allegations of misconduct against him in October 1998. However, Noble does dispute the truth of Swaine's findings. .)...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kesler v. Barris, Sott, Denn & Driker, Pllc
...Club of N.M., Inc., 420 F.3d 1098, 1121 (10th Cir. 2005); Feltmann v. Sieben, 108 F.3d 970, 976-77 (8th Cir.1997); Noble v. Sheahan, 132 F.Supp.2d 626, 642 (N.D.Ill.2001); Cruse v. G & J USA Pub., 96 F.Supp.2d 320, 327 Furthermore, even if plaintiff could establish a prima facie case of ret......
-
Grana v. Illinois Dept. of Transp.
...action of which he complains. Stone v. City of Indianapolis Pub. Util. Div., 281 F.3d 640, 644 (7th Cir.2002); Noble v. Sheahan, 132 F.Supp.2d 626, 633 (N.D.Ill.2001) (quoting Cowan v. Glenbrook Sec. Servs., 123 F.3d 438, 443 (7th Cir.1997)). Moreover, mere temporal proximity between the pr......
-
Schulz v. Varian Medical Systems, Inc.
...2002 for violating his probation. Schulz, however, disputes the basis of these disciplinary actions. Schulz relies on Noble v. Sheahan, 132 F.Supp.2d 626 (N.D.Ill.2001), for the proposition that he can establish that he was meeting Varian's legitimate expectations by showing that the discip......
-
Governmental documents
...ordinary course of business. See also Dubois v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co ., 734 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. La. 1990). Noble v. Sheahan , 132 F.Supp.2d 626 (N.D. Ill. 2001). In civil rights action against Sheriff and his office, investigative report covering deputy sheriff was admissible over o......
-
Governmental Documents
...ordinary course of business. See also Dubois v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co ., 734 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. La. 1990). Noble v. Sheahan , 132 F.Supp.2d 626 (N.D. Ill. 2001). In civil rights action against Sheriff and his office, investigative report covering deputy sheriff was admissible over o......
-
Governmental Documents
...ordinary course of business. See also Dubois v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co ., 734 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. La. 1990). Noble v. Sheahan , 132 F.Supp.2d 626 (N.D. Ill. 2001). In civil rights action against Sheriff and his office, investigative report covering deputy sheriff was admissible over o......
-
Governmental Documents
...ordinary course of business. See also Dubois v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co ., 734 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. La. 1990). Noble v. Sheahan , 132 F.Supp.2d 626 (N.D. Ill. 2001). In civil rights action against Sheriff and his office, investigative report covering deputy sheriff was admissible over o......