Caine v. Burge
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131812
N.D. Ill.2012Background
- Caine moves to reconsider a prior order that dismissed Count I's § 1983 due-process claim alleging police fabrication of evidence.
- The earlier dismissal relied on Newsome v. McCabe and related Seventh Circuit authority holding such claims sound in malicious prosecution, not § 1983 due process.
- Caine argues Whitlock v. Brueggemann (May 30, 2012) changed controlling law and warrants allowing § 1983 relief for police fabrication.
- This Court clarifies Whitlock did not overrule Newsome, McCann, Brooks, or Fox and is distinguishable on its facts and procedural posture.
- Alexander v. McKinney (2012) reaffirmed McCann and Brooks, limiting fabrication of evidence by police to malicious-prosecution claims, not § 1983 due process.
- The court concludes that reconsideration is inappropriate and denies the motion; Whitlock remains non-controlling precedent in this context.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Whitlock control the rule on fabrication of evidence and § 1983 due process? | Caine contends Whitlock changes controlling law. | Whitlock does not overrule Newsome/McCann/Brooks/Fox and is distinguishable. | Denied; Whitlock not controlling precedent here. |
| Can police fabrication of evidence state a § 1983 due-process claim? | Whitlock suggests such fabrication may support due-process liability. | Alexander, McCann, and Brooks hold fabrication by police alone does not state a due-process claim; it's malicious prosecution under state law. | Foreclosed; claims sound in malicious prosecution, not § 1983 due process. |
| Is reconsideration appropriate for an interlocutory order under Rule 54(b)? | Rule 54(b) allows reconsideration for changes in controlling law. | Reconsideration is rare and not warranted here; no controlling change in law applies. | Denied; no substantial basis to alter the interlocutory ruling. |
Key Cases Cited
- Newsome v. McCabe, 256 F.3d 747 (7th Cir.2001) (malicious prosecution framework forecloses § 1983 due-process claim)
- McCann v. Mangialardi, 337 F.3d 782 (7th Cir.2003) (police fabrication of evidence sounds in malicious prosecution)
- Brooks v. City of Chicago, 564 F.3d 830 (7th Cir.2009) (falsification/withholding evidence → malicious prosecution; no § 1983 claim)
- Fox v. Hayes, 600 F.3d 819 (7th Cir.2010) (hybrid claims not viable as § 1983 due-process claims)
- Whitlock v. Brueggemann, 682 F.3d 567 (7th Cir.2012) (addressed prosecutor’s misconduct; context dissimilar and not controlling here)
- Alexander v. McKinney, 692 F.3d 553 (7th Cir.2012) (limits Whitlock; reaffirms McCann/Brooks; police fabrication not § 1983 due-process)
- Parish v. City of Chicago, 594 F.3d 551 (7th Cir.2009) (malicious prosecution remains governing principle in Illinois)
- Jones v. City of Chicago, 856 F.2d 985 (7th Cir.1988) ( Brady-based liability context for police)