119 F.4th 507
7th Cir.2024Background
- In February 2020, Wauwatosa, WI police officer Joseph Mensah shot and killed Alvin Cole, a Black teenager, prompting months of local protests during a period of national protests over police violence.
- Anticipating unrest following the district attorney’s decision not to charge Mensah, the Wauwatosa mayor imposed a limited five-day nighttime curfew in October 2020.
- Plaintiffs, affected by the curfew or involved in protests, filed sixteen claims (primarily First Amendment and Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) claims) against the city and individual officials under § 1983 and state law.
- Most claims were dismissed; only DPPA claims proceeded to trial where defendants prevailed.
- Plaintiffs appealed alleged errors at multiple procedural stages: summary judgment on First Amendment claims, dismissal and denial of amendment for § 1983 claims, and the trial court’s handling of a jury question.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Amendment – Curfew as speech restriction | Curfew was not justified, overly broad, and lacked alternatives | Curfew was content-neutral, narrowly tailored, with alternatives | Curfew was a lawful time/place/manner restriction |
| Dismissal of §1983 claims against individuals | Court erroneously dismissed and claims were adequately pled | Claims sought wrong relief type (injunctive/declaratory vs. damages) and ignored court’s instruction | Dismissal appropriate; correct capacity/relief needed |
| Denial of leave to amend complaint | Plaintiffs should have had another chance to amend | Plaintiffs repeatedly failed to cure defects despite guidance | No abuse of discretion in denying further amendment |
| DPPA jury instruction | Jury should have been told directly that certain info was personal | Original instruction was correct; jury should rely on it | No abuse of discretion referring jury to original instruction |
Key Cases Cited
- Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (First Amendment protections for public issues)
- Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781 (standard for time, place, manner restrictions)
- Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703 (significant government interest in public safety)
- Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U.S. 474 (narrow tailoring in speech regulation)
- Members of City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 466 U.S. 789 (alternative channels of communication)
- Greenawalt v. Ind. Dep’t of Corr., 397 F.3d 587 (official/individual capacity under § 1983)
- Stanard v. Nygren, 658 F.3d 792 (limits to liberal amendment of complaints)