Orsa v. Police Board of the City of Chicago
2016 IL App (1st) 121709
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- In March 2006 three off-duty Chicago police officers (Murphy, Orsa, McNamara) and a civilian companion assaulted patron Obed DeLeon inside a Taco & Burrito King; surveillance video (no audio) shows Murphy point a gun at DeLeon and the group punch and kick him.
- DeLeon filed a complaint; OPS/IPRA investigation concluded and, in July 2010, the superintendent charged Murphy and Orsa with multiple CPD rule violations (including misuse of a weapon, excessive force, failure to report, and false statements).
- At the Police Board hearing, witnesses Nelson, Mularczyk, and a security guard testified DeLeon did not threaten anyone; the Board credited them, discredited the officers and their witnesses, found the officers guilty, and discharged Murphy and Orsa (suspending a third officer).
- The circuit court reversed on administrative review, ruling the charges were barred by laches and finding the video supported the officers’ claim that DeLeon threatened them; the superintendent appealed.
- The appellate court reversed the circuit court: it held the Board’s findings were prima facie correct, laches and due-process/time-based dismissal were not shown, the video supported the Board’s credibility determinations, and discharge was not arbitrary or unrelated to service requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness / Due process (delay in charging) | Charges were filed ~4+ years after incident; delay violated due process and municipal directives requiring timely investigation | Delay did not deprive plaintiffs of property or meaningful hearing; they remained employed and received full Board hearing | Denied: no due process violation; investigation/charging within applicable statute of limitations and plaintiffs received notice and hearing |
| Chicago Municipal Code / CPD General Orders compliance | Ordinance and General Orders required timely resolution/notice; failure should bar charges | Statute/ordinance did not create automatic dismissal remedy; extensions were permitted and were obtained | Denied: Code did not mandate dismissal; no authority for automatic sanction; investigations timely managed under rules |
| Laches (prejudice from delay) | Delay prejudiced ability to locate witnesses and preserve memories; witnesses might have contradicted Board witnesses | No proof of actual prejudice; assertions speculative; laches rarely applied against government absent extraordinary circumstances | Denied: plaintiffs failed to show prejudice or extraordinary circumstances to invoke laches |
| Manifest weight / Cause for discharge (credibility & discipline) | Video and witness testimony support officers’ account that DeLeon threatened them, so Board finding against officers is contrary to manifest weight | Board properly credited civilian witnesses and video (no audio) — officer testimony inconsistent with video and conduct (leaving scene, not reporting) | Affirmed Board: findings prima facie correct; credibility determinations supported; conduct (pointing gun, kicks, false reports, failing to report) justified discharge |
Key Cases Cited
- Krocka v. Police Board, 327 Ill. App. 3d 36 (affirming review deference to administrative Board) (1st Dist. 2001)
- Department of Mental Health & Developmental Disabilities v. Civil Service Comm’n, 85 Ill. 2d 547 (framework for reviewing administrative findings) (Ill. 1981)
- Marconi v. Chicago Heights Police Pension Board, 225 Ill. 2d 497 (deference to administrative factfinding) (Ill. 2007)
- Abrahamson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation, 153 Ill. 2d 76 (standard for overturning administrative findings as contrary to manifest weight) (Ill. 1992)
- Walsh v. Board of Fire & Police Commissioners, 96 Ill. 2d 101 (definition of "cause" for discharge) (Ill. 1983)
- Siwek v. Police Board, 374 Ill. App. 3d 735 (discipline and departmental needs justify discharge) (1st Dist. 2007)