Burrell v. Vill. of Sauk Vill. & Timothy Holevis & Robert Grossman
96 N.E.3d 375
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Barry J. Burrell was arrested, indicted, tried for first-degree murder of his one-month-old niece Kailie, and later acquitted by a jury; he then sued Sauk Village and two detectives for malicious prosecution and IIED.
- Facts known to police: Kailie suffered multiple severe blunt-force injuries (skull fracture, brain swelling, bilateral rib fractures, femur fracture, optic nerve hemorrhages, internal organ injuries); medical examiner Dr. Michelle Jordan ruled the death a homicide and testified the injuries were consistent with adult-caused blunt trauma, not an accident or injury caused by a child.
- Burrell admitted during interview to a false statement that he passed out while holding Kailie and his shoulder landed on her; his story changed multiple times on recorded interviews. Family testimony indicated Burrell was the only adult present at the approximate time of injury; a niece Kendra later said she tripped and dropped the baby, but detectives did not learn of or rely on those statements until late.
- Prosecutors (felony review and grand jury) approved charges and returned a true bill; trial court denied Burrell’s motion to quash arrest. Two assistant state’s attorneys involved believed probable cause existed despite the defense theory that Kendra caused the injuries.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing probable cause existed to prosecute, which would bar malicious prosecution; the trial court granted summary judgment and dismissed Burrell’s malicious prosecution claim (the IIED claim was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds and not appealed).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was probable cause to charge Burrell with first-degree murder | Burrell: detectives lacked probable cause because they failed to investigate alternative suspect (Kendra) and ignored exculpatory statements | Defendants: medical examiner’s homicide finding, Burrell’s inconsistent/confessional statements, witnesses placing Burrell as sole adult, prosecutor review and grand jury produced probable cause | Court: Probable cause existed based on totality of circumstances; summary judgment for defendants affirmed |
| Whether malice was shown for malicious prosecution claim | Burrell: prosecution was commenced with knowledge of innocence / bad faith | Defendants: reasonable belief in guilt negates malice | Court: Plaintiff forfeited malice argument; in any event probable cause defeat means claim fails |
| Whether investigatory omissions (not interviewing Kendra earlier) negate probable cause | Burrell: failure to interview Kendra and consider her statements shows lack of reasonable investigation and probable cause | Defendants: ME opinion rendered child-caused theory implausible; prosecutors and grand jury independently reviewed evidence | Court: Omissions did not make detectives’ belief unreasonable; probable cause remains |
| Whether prior proceedings (felony review, grand jury, trial court denial of motion to quash) affect malicious prosecution analysis | Burrell: these do not cure investigative failures | Defendants: those checks support reasonableness of prosecution | Court: Those procedural checks reinforced the objective reasonableness of arrest/prosecution |
Key Cases Cited
- Ioerger v. Halverson Construction Co., 232 Ill. 2d 196 (summary judgment standard)
- Williams v. Manchester, 228 Ill. 2d 404 (summary judgment review and construing facts against movant)
- Weather-Tite, Inc. v. University of St. Francis, 233 Ill. 2d 385 (de novo review of summary judgment)
- Sang Ken Kim v. City of Chicago, 368 Ill. App. 3d 648 (probable cause may exist despite later recantation or omitted investigative steps where medical findings support belief)
- Fabiano v. City of Palos Hills, 336 Ill. App. 3d 635 (elements of malicious prosecution)
- Ross v. Mauro Chevrolet, 369 Ill. App. 3d 794 (definition of probable cause in malicious prosecution)
- Swick v. Liautaud, 169 Ill. 2d 504 (absence of any element defeats malicious prosecution claim)
- Turner v. City of Chicago, 91 Ill. App. 3d 931 (probable cause is an absolute bar to malicious prosecution)