Taylor v. Cook Cnty. Sheriff's Office

• Decision Date: 04 March 2020
• Docket Number: Case No. 13-cv-1856
• Citation: 442 F.Supp.3d 1031
• Parties: Percy R. TAYLOR, Plaintiffs, v. COOK COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

442 F.Supp.3d 1031

Percy R. TAYLOR, Plaintiffs,

v.COOK COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-1856

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division.

Signed March 4, 2020

Richard F. Linden, Law Offices of Richard Linden, Peter Vincent Bustamante, Law Offices of Peter V. Bustamante, Chicago, IL, Dana L. Kurtz, Kurtz Law Offices, Ltd., Hinsdale, IL, for Plaintiffs.

Nile N. Miller, Pavlina Kochankovska, Patricia Maria Fallon, James Chandler, Mona E. Lawton, Cook County State's Attorney's Office John Joseph Rock, Andrew Joseph Grill, Catherine Macneil Barber, James Bryan Novy, Patrick R. Moran, Stacy Ann Benjamin, Cory D. Anderson, Rock Fusco & Connelly, LLC, Grace E. Mangieri, Gretchen Harris Sperry, James Matthias Lydon, Robert Thomas Shannon, Vincent Michael Rizzo, Virginia Brette Bensinger Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Colleen B. Cavanaugh, O'Rourke, Hogan, Fowler & Dwyer, LLC, Chicago, IL, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

MARY M. ROWLAND, United States District Judge

This lawsuit arises from Percy Taylor's termination from his job as a police officer with the Cook County Sheriff's Office. Taylor brought this lawsuit against Defendants Cook County Sheriff's Office, Sheriff Thomas Dart, Gregory Ernst, Patrick Fitzgerald, the Estate of Patrick Murphy, Joseph Ways, and Zelda Whittler, alleging violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"), as well as state law claims for malicious prosecution and breach of contract. Cook County is sued for purposes of indemnification only. Defendants all moved for summary judgment (Dkts. 458, 460, 462).

For the reasons stated below, the Sheriff's Office Defendants' summary judgment motion [462] is granted in part and denied in part; the OPR Defendants' motion [460] is granted in part and denied in part; and Cook County's motion [458] is denied.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Summary judgment is proper where "the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) ; see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317, 322, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). A genuine dispute as to any material fact exists if "the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). The substantive law controls which facts are material.

Id. After a "properly supported motion for summary judgment is made, the adverse party must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Id. at 250, 106 S.Ct. 2505 (internal quotations omitted).

The Court "consider[s] all of the evidence in the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and [ ] draw[s] all reasonable inferences from that evidence in favor of the party opposing summary judgment." Skiba v. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co. , 884 F.3d 708, 717 (7th Cir. 2018) (internal citation and quotations omitted). In doing so, the Court gives the non-moving party "the benefit of reasonable inferences from the evidence, but not speculative inferences in [its] favor." White v. City of Chi. , 829 F.3d 837, 841 (7th Cir. 2016) (internal citations omitted). "The controlling question is whether a reasonable trier of fact could find in favor of the non-moving party on the evidence submitted in support of and opposition to the motion for summary judgment." Id. (citation omitted).

BACKGROUND

A. The Parties

Mr. Taylor: Percy Taylor ("Taylor"), who is African-American, began his employment with the Cook County Sheriff's Office in 1995 as a Deputy Sheriff, and in January 2000, was promoted to Police Officer which is the position he held at the time relevant to this lawsuit. (FAC ¶4, SSOF ¶2).¹

OPR Defendants: Gregory Ernst ("Ernst"), Patrick Fitzgerald ("Fitzgerald"), and the Estate of Patrick Murphy ("Murphy") (collectively, "OPR Defendants"), were Cook County Sheriff's Department employees assigned to the Sheriff's Office's Office of Professional Review ("OPR"). (OSOF ¶2). During March 2011, OPR Defendants were employed as Deputy Sheriffs—Murphy was an Assistant Director in the OPR; Ernst, a Senior Investigator; and Fitzgerald, an Investigator. Id. OPR investigates complaints made against Sheriff's Office employees; it conducts criminal and administrative investigations into allegations that those employees violated the law or the Sheriff's Office General Orders. (Id. ¶3). Ernst was the senior and lead investigator assigned to Taylor's case in March 2011. (PSOF ¶12).

Sheriff's Office Defendants: The Sheriff's Office Defendants are Sheriff Thomas J. Dart ("Sheriff Dart"), Undersheriff Zelda Whittler ("Whittler"), Joseph Ways ("Ways") and the Cook County Sheriff's Office ("Sheriff's Office"). Sheriff Dart is the Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois. (SSOF ¶3). Whittler was the Undersheriff of Cook County at all relevant times. (Id. ¶5). Ways was the Executive Director of the OPR at all relevant times; he retired from the Sheriff's Office in February 2013. (Id. ¶4). Dart, Whittler, and Ways are referred to as "Executive Defendants." (Dkt. 463 at 3).

B. Events in 2011

On March 8, 2011, Harold Woolfolk ("Woolfolk") was working on the pickup truck of Mary Wolfe ("Wolfe") when Woolfolk accused Taylor of shooting at him with a BB gun, and Wolfe called 911, twice, reporting that someone shot at the windshield of her pickup truck. (OSOF ¶¶5, 8–10). Two Chicago Police Department (CPD) officers arrived. (Id. ¶11). One of the police officers, Mary McGowan ("McGowan") observed damage to Wolfe's truck which McGowan believed was caused by some type of bullet, and reported that nine shots struck the vehicle. (Id. ¶14). McGowan wrote an original case report. (Id. ¶16).² The same day, March 8, OPR was notified that CPD was investigating a shooting incident involving a Cook County Sheriff's Department employee, and Ernst obtained the police report authored by McGowan. (Id. ¶18). The next day, March 9, the OPR Defendants went to 1915 S. Avers to interview the victims and obtain photographic evidence of the vehicle that was struck. (Id. ¶19). The OPR Defendants spoke to Woolfolk who said he saw his neighbor shooting at him. (Id. ¶20). Wolfe told the OPR Defendants that she went outside and saw Woolfolk shaking and Woolfolk said he had been shot at by the neighbor and that there was damage to the truck, and Wolfe then called 911. (Id. ¶21). The OPR Defendants observed what appeared to be nine pellets or shots on the vehicle. (Id. ¶22). While speaking to the investigators, Woolfolk pointed and identified Taylor as the man he saw shooting at him the day before. (Id. ¶23). Woolfolk told the investigators that he wanted to press charges against Taylor. (Id. ). At the direction of Murphy, Ernst and Fitzgerald placed Taylor into custody. (Id. ¶24). Murphy then spoke with the CPD officers, and CPD turned the investigation over to OPR because Taylor was a Sheriff's Office employee. (Id. ¶25).

The next day, March 10, OPR obtained a search warrant for the top floor of 1916 S. Hamlin (where they believed Taylor lived) and Taylor's vehicle. (Id. ¶28). OPR investigators Ernst, Fitzgerald and others conducted a search of Taylor's unit and vehicle. (Id. ¶30). Murphy was not present during these searches. (Id. ). Taylor denied shooting at the truck and/or Woolfolk and told OPR investigators that he was at the grocery store when the alleged shooting happened. (Id. ¶32). OPR investigators obtained video surveillance from the grocery store, and after conducting a time study, determined that Taylor could have committed the shooting and arrived at the store when he did. (Id. ¶¶33–34). OPR investigators did not recover a BB gun or BB gun pellets during the search. (Id. ¶31). On March 16, 2011, Woolfolk and Wolfe signed criminal complaints against Taylor for aggravated assault and criminal damage to property. (Id. ¶36). Taylor was prosecuted by the Cook County State's Attorney's Office for criminal damage to property and aggravated assault, but his charges were ultimately dismissed. (Id. ¶¶38, 40).

In September 2011, an incident occurred at the Daley Center involving Sheriff's Deputies Timothy DeCook and David Nowacki resulting in Nowacki signing a criminal complaint against Taylor for misdemeanor battery because Nowacki alleged that Taylor grabbed his hand and twisted it. (Id. ¶¶42, 58). Ernst, Fitzgerald, and another OPR investigator arrested Taylor for battery against Nowacki. (Id. ). Also in September 2011, Cook County Services Deputy Sergeant Gilberto Guerrero filed a complaint alleging that Taylor threatened him. (Id. ¶64). Accordingly, in 2011, OPR conducted three separate investigations of Taylor for: (1) firing a pellet rifle at his neighbor and failing to report a conviction for a DUI ("Shooting/DUI Incident");³ (2) battering and assaulting two deputy sheriffs ("Battery Incident"); and (3) threatening a superior officer ("Threat Incident"). (SSOF ¶7).

C. Loudermill and Merit Board Proceedings

On March 22, 2011, Taylor attended a Loudermill hearing about the Shooting/DUI Incident. (SSOF ¶8). The Loudermill board voted to suspend Taylor with pay pending Merit Board action. (Id. ).

Ernst's April 11, 2011 report of investigation was reviewed and approved by Unit Director Edward Dyner who then submitted it to Director Ways. (Id. ¶9). On April 18, 2011, Ways sustained the charges based on the evidence of misconduct and recommended Taylor's termination. (Id. ¶13). As part of the Command Channel Review ("CCR") process, Chief of the Sheriff's Police Department Dwayne Holbrook signed off on the ROI on April 20, 2011; Director Ways signed off on April 27, 2011; Undersheriff Whittler signed off on April 28, 2011. (Id. ¶¶36, 37; PSOF, Exh. 25). The complaint was filed with the Merit Board on October 20, 2011. (PSOF ¶33). On February 27, 2013, the Merit Board...