Stevenson v. City of Chi.
| Decision Date | 13 April 2018 |
| Docket Number | No. 17 CV 4839,17 CV 4839 |
| Parties | ISIAH STEVENSON and MICHAEL COKES, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
AMY J. ST. EVE, District Court Judge:
Plaintiffs Isiah Stevenson ("Stevenson") and Michael Cokes ("Cokes") (collectively "Plaintiffs") bring this action against the City of Chicago, a municipal corporation ("City"); City of Chicago Police ("CPD") Officer Dean W. Ewing, individually and as an agent of the City of Chicago ("CPD Officer Ewing" or "Ewing"); the Village of Tinley Park, Illinois, a municipal corporation ("Tinley Park"); Tinley Park Police Department ("TPPD") Officers S.J. Tencza, J.G. Vega, S.R. Heim, T.A. Poulos, A.H. Campbell, and D.M. Walker, individually and as agents of Tinley Park (collectively "TPPD Officers"); the Illinois State Police ("ISP"); the Director of ISP, Leo Schmitz ("ISP Director Schmitz" or "Schmitz"); and ISP Trooper Brian Walker ("ISP Trooper Walker" or "Walker"). Plaintiffs bring thirteen counts against Defendants in their Second Amended Complaint (the "SAC") relating to a July 1, 2016, vehicle pursuit and resulting rollover and crash. (R. 63, "SAC.") Before the Court are three motions to dismiss different counts by the three groups of defendants, namely, City of Chicago and CPD Officer Ewing (R. 67.); Tinley Park and the TPPD Officers (R. 66.); and ISP, ISP Director Schmitz, and ISP Trooper Walker (R. 65.).
For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and denies in part Defendants' motions to dismiss with and without prejudice. The Court denies the City of Chicago's motion to dismiss the Monell claim as alleged in Count IX. The Court grants without prejudice the motion to dismiss the Monell claim against Tinley Park in Count XIII, but denies the Tinley Park Defendants' motion to dismiss the willful and wanton claims in Counts III and IV. As to the ISP Defendants, the Court grants with prejudice Defendants' motion to dismiss Counts V, VII, and XII against ISP based on ISP's Eleventh Amendment immunity. The Court grants the ISP Defendants' motion to dismiss Count V against ISP Director Schmitz in his individual capacity without prejudice. The Court denies, however, Defendants' motion to dismiss Count VI against ISP Trooper Walker. As for Counts X and XI, the indemnification and respondeat superior claims, respectively, the Court denies Tinley Park's and ISP's motions to dismiss these counts. The Court grants Plaintiffs leave to file a Third Amended Complaint consistent with this Opinion by no later than April 27, 2018.
Plaintiffs Stevenson and Cokes reside in Cook County, Illinois. (SAC at ¶ 1.) On July 1, 2016, they were passengers in a gold sedan vehicle that was pursued by various law enforcement agents and crashed after being struck by another vehicle. (Id. at ¶ 12-15.) Defendant City of Chicago is a municipal corporation in Illinois that maintains the CPD. (Id. at ¶ 2.) The City of Chicago employed CPD Officer Dean W. Ewing at the time of the relevant vehicle pursuit and crash. (Id. at ¶ 3.) Defendant Tinley Park is a municipal corporation in Illinois that maintains the TPPD. (Id. at ¶ 4.) Tinley Park employed TPPD Officers S.J. Tencza, J.G. Vega, S.R. Heim, T.A. Poulos, A.H. Campbell, and D.M. Walker at the time of the relevant vehicle pursuit and crash. (Id. at ¶ 5.) Defendant ISP is a governmental entity of the State of Illinois. (Id. at ¶ 6.) ISP Director Leo Schmitz operated this state-wide police agency at the time of the relevant vehicle pursuit and crash. (Id. at ¶ 6.) ISP and ISP Director Schmitz employed Trooper Brian Walker at the time of the relevant vehicle pursuit and crash. (Id. at ¶ 7.)
According to Plaintiffs, on July 1, 2016, Tinley Park Officers Tencza, Vega, Heim, Poulos, Campbell, and Walker responded to calls regarding an alleged armed robbery at an Arby's restaurant in Tinley Park. (Id. at ¶ 9.) The officers began an investigation and interviewed witnesses, consequently reporting the incident as an "armed robbery" to the police dispatch operator, despite, as Plaintiffs allege, "no evidence that weapons were used, displayed, or intimated during the alleged robbery." (Id. at ¶ 10.)
Around 11:00 AM later that same day, a person suspected of being involved in the Arby's robbery drove a gold sedan vehicle in which Stevenson and Cokes were passengers. (Id. at ¶ 12.) While the vehicle was on Interstate 57 in Cook County, ISP Trooper Walker initiated a pursuit headed toward Chicago. (Id. at ¶ 13.) ISP dispatch and Trooper Walker reported that the pursuit was related to an armed robbery and Trooper Walker continued following the vehicle through Chicago. (Id. at ¶ 14.) At some point, CPD joined the vehicle pursuit and around the intersection of 124th Street and Union Street in Chicago, CPD Officer Ewing drove an unmarked 2015 Ford Explorer into the driver's side of the pursued vehicle "with great force at high speed." (Id. at ¶ 15.) The collision caused the gold sedan to roll over and crash. (Id.)
On December 23, 2016, Plaintiffs filed the present lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois ("Cook County Court") alleging claims arising out of the vehicle crash, but only against the City of Chicago and CPD Officer Ewing. (R. 1-2 at 12.) Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint in Cook County Court, filed on June 19, 2017, included the ISP and Tinley Park Defendants. (R. 1-1 at 1; R. 65 at 2.) The City of Chicago Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 28, 2017. (R. 1 at 1.) At that time, Plaintiffs had yet to serve the ISP and Tinley Park Defendants. (Id.; R. 65 at 2.)
In their SAC, filed on September 22, 2017, Plaintiffs allege thirteen counts, including: (Count I) willful and wanton conduct against the City of Chicago; (Count II) willful and wanton conduct against CPD Officer Ewing; (Count III) willful and wanton conduct against Tinley Park; (Count IV) willful and wanton conduct against the individual Tinley Park officers; (Count V) willful and wanton conduct against ISP and Director Schmitz; (Count VI) willful and wanton conduct against ISP Trooper Walker; (Count VII) Fourth Amendment excessive force against Defendants CPD Officer Ewing and ISP Trooper Walker; (Count VIII) civil battery against CPD Officer Ewing; (Count IX) a Monell claim against the City of Chicago; (Count X) indemnification against all three Defendant groups; (Count XI) respondeat superior against all three Defendant groups; (Count XII) a Monell claim against ISP; and (Count XIII) a Monell claim against Tinley Park. Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, consequential damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, and all taxable costs, fees, expenses, and interest.
In Counts I and II, Plaintiffs allege that the City, acting by and through its duly authorized officers, agents, representatives, and employees, including Officer Ewing, had a duty to refrain from willful and wanton conduct that consciously disregarded the safety of the general public, including Plaintiffs. (SAC at ¶ 22, 26.) Despite this duty, the City and CPD Officer Ewing committed willful and wanton acts or omissions, including driving a vehicle at a high speed in a residential neighborhood and crashing into the Plaintiffs' vehicle in gross disregard and indifference for the safety of others. (Id. at ¶ 23.) Specifically, Plaintiffs assert that CPD Officer Ewing drove a City of Chicago vehicle on a residential street at a high rate of speed without activating emergency lights or sirens, that he did not reduce his speed when entering an intersection, and that he drove into Plaintiffs' vehicle with deadly force. (Id. at ¶ 27.) Plaintiffs also allege that the City of Chicago failed to properly monitor and discipline its police officers on and prior to July 1, 2016, to instruct CPD Officer Ewing not to initiate or to discontinue the high speed chase, and to instruct Ewing to use alternative methods to stop the fleeing vehicle. (Id. at ¶ 23.)
Next, in Counts III and IV, Plaintiffs allege that during the relevant time period, Tinley Park, via its officers, agents, representatives and employees, had a duty to refrain from willful and wanton conduct in the exercise and discharge of its duties that consciously disregarded the safety of the general public, including Plaintiffs. (Id. at ¶ 30, 34.) Despite their duty, Tinley Park and its officers acted with willful and wanton conduct, which included reporting and broadcasting the Arby's robbery as an "armed robbery" without information or evidence of weapons at the scene, and giving false testimony to a grand jury on July 28, 2016, to secure a criminal indictment against Plaintiff Stevenson. (Id. at ¶ 31, 35.)
In Counts V and VI, Plaintiffs also maintain that ISP and ISP Director Schmitz, acting by and through their duly authorized officers, agents, representatives, and employees, including ISP Trooper Walker, had a duty to refrain from willful and wanton conduct in the exercise and discharge of their duties that consciously disregarded the safety of the general public. (Id. at ¶ 38, 42.) Despite this duty, ISP, Director Schmitz, and Trooper Walker committed willful and wanton acts or omissions, including driving an ISP vehicle at a high speed through a residential neighborhood, broadcasting over various communication devices that the gold sedan carrying Plaintiffs was involved in an armed robbery in Tinley Park, and initiating and continuing a high-speed pursuit through a residential neighborhood "in the face of imminent danger." (Id. at ¶ 39, 43.) Furthermo...
To continue reading
Request your trial