Humes v. Rosario
3:19-cv-03050
| C.D. Ill. | Feb 23, 2022Background
- On February 27, 2017, Springfield Police Officer Samuel Rosario went to Robert Humes’s home; after a verbal altercation Rosario shoved, pushed to the ground, and repeatedly punched Humes. Video from officer body cameras and a photograph of Humes’s facial injuries were admitted at the damages hearing.
- Rosario was criminally investigated, fired, and in August 2019 convicted by a jury of battery and official misconduct for the same incident.
- Rosario was served in this civil case but did not participate; the district court later entered partial summary judgment finding Rosario liable on Humes’s § 1983, assault, and battery claims.
- Humes sought compensatory and punitive damages under § 1983 and state-law damages for assault and battery, plus attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; he waived a jury for the damages phase and proceeded to a magistrate judge hearing on damages and fees.
- The court found temporary physical injury and ongoing emotional distress (fear of police, humiliation from a YouTube posting), and awarded compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees and costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriate compensatory damages for physical and emotional injuries | Humes sought compensation for physical pain, emotional distress, humiliation, and consequential losses from the video posting | Rosario did not appear or oppose | Court awarded $10,000 compensatory damages (temporary physical pain, ongoing emotional distress) |
| Entitlement to punitive damages and appropriate amount under § 1983 | Humes urged a large punitive award to punish and deter officer misconduct (plaintiff’s counsel suggested $500,000) | No opposition; Rosario already criminally punished | Court found Rosario acted with reprehensible, deliberate misconduct and awarded $50,000 punitive damages to punish and deter similar abuses of power |
| Attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988: hourly rate and lodestar hours | Humes sought $250/hour for 81.5 hours (lodestar $20,375) plus $860.25 costs | No opposition | Court approved $250/hour but reduced the lodestar by half for limited success on other defendants, awarding $10,187.50 in fees + $860.25 costs = $11,047.75 |
| Entry of judgment and scope of recovery | Humes sought judgment for damages, fees, and costs against Rosario | Rosario did not contest | Court recommended judgment in favor of Humes against Rosario for $71,047.75 (10,000 + 50,000 + 11,047.75) |
Key Cases Cited
- Carey v. Piphus, 435 U.S. 247 (1978) (§ 1983 damages principles and compensatory recovery)
- Memphis Community School Dist. v. Stachura, 477 U.S. 299 (1986) (compensatory damages under § 1983)
- Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30 (1983) (standard for punitive damages under § 1983)
- Calhoun v. DeTella, 319 F.3d 936 (7th Cir. 2003) (punitive damages standard in Seventh Circuit)
- Kemezy v. Peters, 79 F.3d 33 (7th Cir. 1996) (purpose of punitive damages to punish and deter)
- Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1 (1991) (limits and purposes of punitive damages)
- Saccameno v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 943 F.3d 1071 (7th Cir. 2019) (distinguishing compensatory from punitive relief)
- Montanez v. Simon, 755 F.3d 547 (7th Cir. 2014) (§ 1988 lodestar analysis and fee factors)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (lodestar method for attorney’s fees)
- Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1986) (procedural note on waiver of objections to magistrate reports)