Townsend v. City of Chicago
2019 IL App (1st) 180771
Ill. App. Ct.2019Background
- On March 2, 2015, officers stopped a red Toyota Solara; after the driver and front passenger were ordered out and handcuffed, backseat passenger Ricky Anderson moved to the driver’s seat and fled.
- Anderson later struck a vehicle occupied by plaintiff Michael Townsend, who suffered various injuries.
- Officers Warchol and Martino encountered the Solara later and apprehended Anderson and another occupant; disputed evidence existed about whether a high-speed police pursuit preceded the crash.
- Townsend sued the City of Chicago and officers (Lewandowski, Warchol, Martino) for willful and wanton conduct; defendants invoked immunity under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act, §4-106(b) (immunity for injuries inflicted by escaped/escaping prisoners).
- The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants, finding Anderson was an “escaping prisoner” within §4-106(b); the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Anderson was an "escaped or escaping prisoner" within §4-106(b) | Townsend: Anderson was not in custody—he was not arrested, not told he was suspected, and thus §4-106(b) does not apply | Defendants: Passenger subjects to traffic-stop control; two occupants were handcuffed and officers constrained movement, so Anderson was in custody when he fled | Court: Anderson was in custody (freedom of movement directly controlled/limited) and thus an escaping prisoner; §4-106(b) immunity applies |
| Whether genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on proximate cause/pursuit | Townsend: Disputed evidence about an unauthorized high-speed pursuit and causation created triable issues | Defendants: Even if pursuit is disputed, immunity bars liability because injuries were inflicted by an escaping prisoner | Court: Discrepancies about pursuit irrelevant once §4-106(b) applies; summary judgment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Reis v. City of Chicago, 242 Ill. 2d 205 (2011) (interprets "custody" under §4-106(b) and holds immunity applies where suspect in police custody escaped and caused injury)
- Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007) (during a traffic stop, officers seize all occupants; passengers are subject to the stop's constraints)
- People v. Campa, 217 Ill. 2d 243 (2005) (discusses elasticity of "custody" and distinguishes physical vs. constructive custody)