816 F. Supp. 2d 541
N.D. Ill.2011Background
- Ibarra sues the City of Chicago, CPD officers Hillman, McDonald, Joyce, Sydel, and Doe officers, supervisors, and Matthew Pritzker under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985(3).
- On July 16, 2009, Pritzker allegedly drove a SUV at Ibarra; Ibarra tapped the door, was allegedly struck, and his bicycle was forced underneath the SUV as Pritzker fled.
- Witnesses reported a hit-and-run; police questioned Ibarra and witnesses and allegedly coerced statements and altered reports to cover for Pritzker.
- Ibarra alleges a pervasive City policy/custom protecting politically connected individuals by covering up misconduct and failing to discipline officers.
- Counts I–III allege 1983 claims (false arrest, First Amendment retaliation, conspiracy); Counts IV, VI state-law false arrest and intentional infliction of emotional distress; Count IX indemnification.
- The court denies the motion to dismiss Counts I, II, III, IV, and VI and grants expedited discovery in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was probable cause for Ibarra's arrest (Count I). | No clear indication of knowledge of a crime at arrest time; facts plausibly negate probable cause. | Ibarra admitted causing criminal damage to Pritzker's vehicle; probable cause exists for arrest. | Probable cause not shown at this stage; Count I survives dismissal denial. |
| Whether Ibarra's arrest violated the First Amendment as retaliation (Count II). | Arrest and detention tied to reporting a crime and lack of political clout; protected activity. | Proper arrest independent of protected activity; plaintiff failed to plead protected conduct. | Plaintiff alleged protected activity (reporting a crime) and but-for causation and deprivation; Count II survives. |
| Whether Monell claims against the City are viable (Counts I and II). | City's policy/custom caused constitutional violations by officers. | No underlying constitutional violation; Monell fails. | Monell claims not barred at this stage; denied dismissal for Counts I and II pending record. |
| Whether a § 1983 conspiracy claim (Count III) is viable. | Pritzker and officers conspired to deprive rights; detailed allegations support a conspiracy claim. | Without underlying injury, conspiracy should fail; but possibility of underlying violation exists. | Conspiracy adequately pleaded; Count III survives dismissal. |
| Whether state-law false arrest and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims (Counts IV and VI) should be dismissed. | Federal claims support jurisdiction for related state-law claims; probable cause not absolute bar here. | Probable cause bars state-law claims; no supplemental jurisdiction if federal claims fail. | Court declines to dismiss Counts IV and VI at this stage; continues supplemental jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (U.S. 2004) (probable cause standard governs arrests under Fourth Amendment)
- Woods v. City of Chicago, 234 F.3d 979 (7th Cir. 2001) (an arrest requires probable cause; look to the evidence available at arrest)
- Spiegel v. Cortese, 196 F.3d 717 (7th Cir. 1999) (credible eyewitness can establish probable cause absent contrary evidence)
- Morfin v. City of East Chicago, 349 F.3d 989 (7th Cir. 2003) (probable cause bar to § 1983 false arrest claim)
- Tamayo v. Blagojevich, 526 F.3d 1074 (7th Cir. 2008) (pleading standards; plausibility under Iqbal in § 1983 cases)
- Beauchamp v. City of Noblesville, 320 F.3d 733 (7th Cir. 2003) (circumstantial evidence can support reasonable inferences of wrongdoing)
- Kelley v. Myler, 149 F.3d 641 (7th Cir. 1998) (probable cause and reasonable belief standards for arrests)
- Kodish v. Oakbrook Terrace Fire Protection Dist., 604 F.3d 490 (7th Cir. 2010) (but-for causation standard in retaliation claims)
- Atanus v. Perry, 520 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2008) (direct and circumstantial evidence for discrimination claims)