897 F. Supp. 2d 694
N.D. Ill.2012Background
- Solivan, a pretrial detainee in Cook County CCDOC, sues Dart, Dembosz, Thompson, Revolorio, and Cook County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failure to protect against inmate violence.
- Solivan alleged the March 3, 2009 attack occurred while he was housed on Division One’s maximum-security Tier C2.
- Revolorio, the Tier officer, remained in the control room/bubble from 3:30 p.m. to 6:18 p.m. and allegedly violated Jail Standards by not observing the tier.
- Solivan asserted several facility conditions (no lights, no intercoms/cameras, door-patrol issues) contributed to the attack; he claimed Revolorio knew of door vulnerabilities.
- Solivan’s initial pro se complaint named Dart and John Doe officers; later amendments added Dembosz, Thompson, Revolorio, and Cook County.
- The court granted leave to amend to allege an indemnification charge against Cook County and resolved dispositive motions as to which defendants remain in Count I and II.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the new defendants relate back under Rule 15(c) | Solivan argues amendment relates back to original filing | Dembosz, Thompson, Revolorio contend it's time-barred | Related back; timely per Krupski standard |
| Whether Revolorio states a deliberate indifference claim | Solivan pleads factual risk and supervisor knowledge | Revolorio’s actions not clearly indicate deliberate indifference | Count I as to Revolorio survives; substantial risk shown |
| Whether counts against Dart, Dembosz, Thompson, Cook County survive | Allege personal involvement or official policy/Monell theory | No personal involvement or policy shown; vicarious liability not allowed | Dart, Dembosz, Thompson, Cook County dismissed under §1983 personal/Monell theories; Count II dismissed against all as to these entities |
| Whether Count II indemnification claim against Cook County is proper | County indemnifies Dart/others for damages | Indemnification not properly pled without accompanying damages | Court grants leave to amend to allege an indemnification charge against Cook County |
Key Cases Cited
- Krupski v. Costa Crociere S.p.A., 130 S. Ct. 2485 (U.S. 2010) (relating back requires knowledge and prejudice inquiry focused on defendant)
- Wood v. Worachek, 618 F.2d 1225 (7th Cir. 1980) (amendment not relating back if prejudice)
- Murphy v. Walker, 51 F.3d 714 (7th Cir. 1995) (standard for Rule 12(b)(6) factual pleading sufficiency)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994) (deliberate indifference standard for failure to protect)
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1978) (municipal liability requires policy or custom)
- Wilson v. Civil Town of Clayton, 839 F.2d 375 (7th Cir. 1988) (official capacity claims and personal involvement)
- Duane v. Lane, 959 F.2d 673 (7th Cir. 1992) (clarifies deliberate indifference concept)
- Billman v. Indiana Dept. of Corr., 56 F.3d 785 (7th Cir. 1995) (illustrates knowledge/awareness of risk and deliberate indifference)
- Zarnes v. Rhodes, 64 F.3d 285 (7th Cir. 1995) (pleading substantial risk of harm acceptable at pleading stage)