Moore Ex Rel. Estate of Jones v. Burge, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21530

Background

Plaintiffs (Jones, Burton, Dungey, Freeman, Tillis) allege they were physically abused/tortured by Chicago police officers trained or influenced by Jon Burge during interrogations between 1972–2004.
Suit filed June 2011 (Jones solo); other four added in 2012. Last alleged interrogation for these plaintiffs occurred in 2004.
§1983 claims were dismissed by the district court as time-barred under the two-year Illinois limitations period; the court also held Heck barred four plaintiffs still incarcerated.
Plaintiffs invoke a continuing-violation theory and equitable tolling (arguing futility because Burge would have lied and victims would have lost before his 2010 criminal conviction).
The Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal: held plaintiffs’ claims alleging discrete acts of torture accrued at the time of each incident (not at a later common date), rejected the cross-victim continuing-violation theory, and rejected equitable tolling for lack of diligence.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Accrual/limitations for alleged torture during interrogation	Tolling/continuing-violation: later incidents or a continuing conspiracy push accrual forward	Each torture episode is a discrete wrong; accrual occurs when injury and cause are known	Discrete-act rule controls; accrual at time of each incident, claims time-barred if not timely filed
Effect of Heck v. Humphrey for plaintiffs with convictions	Plaintiffs contend their §1983 claims for pre-trial police misconduct are actionable now	Defendant: Heck may bar claims that would imply conviction invalidity	Court: Heck bars claims that necessarily imply conviction invalidity (dismiss without prejudice), but out-of-court misconduct claims (e.g., torture) accrue independently and are not Heck-barred
Continuing-violation across multiple victims	Plaintiffs: common practice/conspiracy should allow combining victims’ accrual periods	Defendants: accrual is victim-specific; Morgan and Lewis reject cross-victim single accrual	Court: Rejects cross-victim tolling; Morgan controls; each victim has own accrual date
Equitable tolling/futility due to Burge’s likely perjury	Plaintiffs: litigation would have been futile before Burge’s conviction; should toll limitations	Defendants: plaintiffs were not diligent; public reports and prior findings made Burge’s misconduct known	Court: Denies equitable tolling for lack of diligence; public knowledge and prior recovery by other victims undermine futility claim

Key Cases Cited

United States v. Burge, 711 F.3d 803 (7th Cir. 2013) (criminal conviction addressing Burge’s lying about torture)
Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) (statute-of-limitations accrual rule for §1983 claims)
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (§1983 claims that imply conviction invalidity are barred until conviction set aside)
Kubrick v. United States, 444 U.S. 111 (1979) (claim accrues when plaintiff knows both injury and cause)
National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (2002) (discrete acts accrue separately; limits continuing-violation theory)
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007) (limitations and continuing-violation context in employment law)
Lewis v. Chicago, 560 U.S. 205 (2010) (each discrete act produces a separate accrual date despite common practice)
Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (1993) (prosecutorial immunity principles)
Rehberg v. Paulk, 566 U.S. 356 (2012) (witness immunity in §1983 suits)
Booker v. Ward, 94 F.3d 1052 (7th Cir. 1996) (accrual principles for out-of-court police misconduct)
Bass v. Joliet Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 86, 746 F.3d 835 (7th Cir. 2014) (application of Morgan in Seventh Circuit)
Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 2013) (limitations and accrual discussion)
Fairley v. Andrews, 578 F.3d 518 (7th Cir. 2009) (conspiracy claim limits when state actors involved)
Wilson v. City of Chicago, 6 F.3d 1233 (7th Cir. 1993) (earlier decision recognizing Burge-related misconduct)

Affirmed