Rivera Petty v. City of Chicago, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 10748

In October 2003 two men shot and killed Albert Council and wounded others; Frederick Tarver was taken to CPD HQ and, after 13–17 hours, identified Timothy Petty from a photo array as a shooter.
Petty was later arrested, indicted for murder, and detained for about 33 months; at a bench trial Petty was acquitted.
Petty filed a § 1983 suit against the City and individual officers alleging police coerced Tarver (detaining him without food, water, bathroom access, threatening parole revocation) to identify Petty, and that officers failed to disclose this to prosecutors (Brady claim).
He also asserted a Monell claim that Chicago maintained a policy of detaining witnesses against their will, causing his prosecution and detention.
The district court struck Petty’s excess Local Rule 56.1 factual paragraphs, granted summary judgment for defendants on due process and Brady claims, and dismissed the Monell claim; Petty appealed.

Issue	Petty's Argument	Defendants' Argument	Held
Whether district court abused discretion by striking Petty’s excess Local Rule 56.1 facts	District court should have allowed >40 paragraphs given case complexity	Petty violated the local rule and did not seek leave; striking was proper	No abuse of discretion; strict compliance required
Whether coercing a witness to identify Petty gives rise to a due process claim for fabrication of evidence	Coercion produced false identification and thus due process violation (manufactured evidence)	This is a coercion case, not fabrication; coercion harms the witness, not necessarily the defendant’s due process	No cognizable due process claim because allegations reflect coercion, not fabrication of evidence
Whether failure to disclose Tarver’s treatment to prosecutors violated Brady	Officers concealed coercion, withholding impeachment/exculpatory evidence from prosecution	Petty knew of Tarver’s alleged coercion pretrial, litigated suppression, and had opportunity to use evidence at trial	No Brady violation — information was known and available pretrial, so no suppression/prejudice
Whether City is liable under Monell for an alleged policy of detaining witnesses	City had a widespread policy causing Petty’s wrongful prosecution and detention	No underlying constitutional violation of Petty’s rights occurred; Monell requires an actual constitutional injury	Monell claim fails because no constitutional violation by officers was established

Whitlock v. Brueggemann, 682 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2012) (fabrication-of-evidence can violate due process when police/prosecutors knowingly create false evidence)
Fields v. Wharrie, 740 F.3d 1107 (7th Cir. 2014) (distinguishes coerced testimony from fabricated testimony; fabrication can state a due process claim)
Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 20 F.3d 789 (7th Cir. 1994) (coercion injures the witness; coerced testimony does not necessarily give the accused a due process claim)
McCann v. Mangialardi, 337 F.3d 782 (7th Cir. 2003) (manufacturing evidence often framed as malicious prosecution rather than a due process claim)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution must disclose exculpatory/impeaching evidence)
Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires a policy or custom that causes a constitutional deprivation)
Ray v. City of Chicago, 629 F.3d 660 (7th Cir. 2011) (state tort remedies may preclude certain § 1983 claims alleging malicious prosecution)
Koszola v. Board of Education of City of Chicago, 385 F.3d 1104 (7th Cir. 2004) (local summary judgment rules and consequences for noncompliance)