21 F.4th 481
7th Cir.2021Background
- In Feb 2006 Cory Lovelace died at home; initial investigation and autopsy returned "undetermined" cause with substantial medical evidence supporting natural causes (advanced fatty liver/cirrhosis) and no signs of violent trauma.
- In 2013 Detective Adam Gibson reviewed old photos and developed a pillow-suffocation theory; Coroner James Keller joined and the two pursued a renewed homicide investigation.
- Gibson and Keller solicited opinions from multiple pathologists; some experts rejected suffocation but Dr. Jane Turner produced a report supporting suffocation after being given a selectively framed and, in part, inaccurate factual narrative.
- Curt Lovelace was arrested in Aug 2014, detained ~21 months in jail and ~9 months under house arrest; FOIA disclosures after a mistrial revealed withheld and misleading communications with experts; Curt was acquitted at a second trial in Mar 2017.
- Curt sued Gibson, Keller, and police supervisors under the Fourth Amendment (malicious prosecution / detention without probable cause) and the Fourteenth Amendment (Brady / fabrication of evidence). The district court denied qualified immunity; defendants appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fourth Amendment (Count II): detention/arrest without probable cause (malicious prosecution) | Lovelace: arrest and lengthy pretrial detention lacked probable cause because Gibson/Keller fabricated/manipulated evidence and withheld exculpatory materials | Gibson/Keller: asserted (or should be accorded) qualified immunity and that probable cause existed; also sought interlocutory review | Appeal dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction: defendants failed to clearly present qualified-immunity argument below and there are disputed material facts (credibility, expert manipulation) precluding interlocutory review of probable-cause issues |
| Fourteenth Amendment (Count I): Brady and evidence-fabrication due-process claim | Lovelace: officers suppressed/exaggerated evidence and fabricated facts to experts in violation of Brady and due process | Defs: qualified immunity; contested liability | Court reversed district court denial of qualified immunity on Count I because Lovelace conceded that circuit precedent forecloses this Fourteenth Amendment theory; remanded to enter summary judgment for defendants on that claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Mohawk Indus., Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) (standards for collateral-order interlocutory appeals)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (qualified immunity denials are appealable to the extent they present legal questions)
- Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (1995) (no interlocutory review where denial turns on disputed factual issues)
- Manuel v. City of Joliet, 903 F.3d 667 (7th Cir. 2018) (recognizing Fourth Amendment right not to be detained without probable cause)
- Gutierrez v. Kermon, 722 F.3d 1003 (7th Cir. 2013) (summary-judgment inferences for nonmovant; limits on collateral-appeal when factual disputes exist)
- Lewis v. City of Chicago, 914 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2019) (circuit precedent on Fourteenth Amendment theory related to Brady/evidence-fabrication)
- Kuri v. City of Chicago, 990 F.3d 573 (7th Cir. 2021) (confirming limits on Fourteenth Amendment fabrication/Brady claims)
- Puffer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 675 F.3d 709 (7th Cir. 2012) (arguments may be waived if underdeveloped or not adequately raised)