Recent Civil Rights Law Decisions

In plaintiff's second employment discrimination suit against the Chicago Police Department (CPD) claiming retaliation and sex discrimination, summary judgment in favor of CPD is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff provided insufficient evidence that she suffered an adverse employment action because she engaged in statutorily protected activity by direct method of proof that either of her two actionable transfers occurred because of her prior lawsuit or her 2006 grievance; 2) plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to establish a causal connection under the indirect method of proof; and 3) plaintiff failed on her sex discrimination claim for the same reason as her retaliation claim, as she failed to adduce any evidence indicating that her actionable transfers were because of her sex.     

Read O'Neal v. City of Chicago, No. 09-1716

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided November 17, 2009

Judges

Before:   Bauer, Wood, and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Bauer, Circuit Judge

In plaintiffs' Fair Housing Act (FHA) suit against their condo association for being required to remove a mezuzah from their doorpost under a new rule requiring that common hallways and outside of the doors be kept free of any objects, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor the condo association and its president is reversed for the most part where: 1) the judgment of the district court with respect to plaintiffs' claims under sections 3604(b), 3617 and 1982 is reversed as a trier of fact could conclude that the condo association's  reinterpretation of the hallway rule and clearing of all objects from doorposts was intended to target only group of residents for which the prohibited practice was religiously required; 2) plaintiffs can therefore proceed on an intentional discrimination theory under sections 3604(b), 3617 and 1982; and 3) district court's judgment granting summary judgment against the plaintiffs on their section 3604(a) claim is affirmed.   

Read Bloch v. Frischholz, No. 06-3376

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided November 13, 2009

Judges

Before:  Easterbrook, Chief Judge, and Bauer, Kanne, Wood, Evans, Sykes, Tinder and Posner, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Tinder, Circuit Judge

An independent journalist's petition for permission to intervene to challenge a protective order that prohibited public disclosure of confidential voluminous materials relating to citizen complaints against the officers  after a plaintiff's settlement against the city of Chicago and several members of its police department, district court's order simultaneously granting the journalist's request to intervene and lifting the order in its entirety is vacated because the petition to intervene should have been dismissed for lack of standing where: 1) the controversy originally supporting the court's jurisdiction no longer existed at the time the court acted on the petition; 2) the parties had settled; 3) the case was dismissed with prejudice; and 4) neither plaintiff nor the city asked the court to revisit and modify the terms of the protective order postjudgment.  Furthermore, the district court lacked any alternative jurisdictional basis to revisit and revoke the protective order sua sponte as there is no presumption of public access emanating from Rule 26(c)'s good cause requirement for discovery that is not party of the court file.     

Read Bond v. Utreras, No. 07-2651

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided November 10, 2009

Judges

Before:  Kanne, Sykes, and Tinder, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Sykes, Circuit Judge

In plaintiff's class action lawsuit against the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners (Board) alleging violation of the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA), dismissal of the complaint is affirmed as, since a voter registration form filled out at the DMV is not a motor vehicle record under the DPPA, the Board could not have violated the DPPA by disclosing plaintiff's personal information to the extent that it did. 

Read Lake v. Neal, No. 08-3765

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided November 6, 2009

Judges

Before: Easterbrook, Chief Judge, and Evans and Bauer, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Evans, Circuit Judge

In plaintiff-police officer's ADA claim against defendant-village, dismissal of his case on the ground of judicial estoppel is affirmed where: 1) to succeed on an ADA claim, a plaintiff must show that with or without reasonable accommodations, he can perform the essential functions of his job; and 2) here, accepting plaintiff's sworn testimony before the pension board as true, the court could not see how he could perform essential police functions with or without accommodations. 

Read Butler v. Village of Round Lake Police Dep't, No. 08-3856

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Before:  Posner, Manion, and Evans, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Evans, Circuit Judge

In plaintiff's case against several police officers and others, arising from his arrest outside a nightclub for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon, of which he was later acquitted, magistrate judge's order denying reconsideration of plaintiff's post-trial motions is affirmed as the motion was untimely under Rule 59(e) and improper under Rule 60(b).     

Read Kiswani v. Phoenix Sec. Agency, Inc., No. 08-3468

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Argued September 11, 2009
Decided October 16, 2009

Judges

Before:  Bauer, Rovner and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Bauer, Circuit Judge

In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action against state officials involved in the management of a Illinois Beach State Park and the state agency that operates the park charging infringement of free speech, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed as the denial of display rack space for plaintiff's pamphlets warning of asbestos in the park may risk the appearance of endorsing an opinion that the defendants do not believe, and if they were to display their own pamphlet countering plaintiff's, this would have the effect of giving it legitimacy which the defendants are not obligated to acknowledge.  

Read Illinois Dunesland Pres. Soc'y v. Illinois Dep't. of Natural Res, No. 09-1535

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Argued September 11, 2009
Decided October 14, 2009

Judges

Before:  Easterbrook, Chief Judge, Posner and Wood, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Posner, Circuit Judge

In plaintiffs' lawsuit against various Illinois state officials arising from termination of their employment with the Illinois Department of Corrections after a change in the governing party, district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendants is affirmed where: 1) summary judgment on the First Amendment claims was appropriate as the witness's statement that voting records were accessed and used in certain personnel decision is inadmissible hearsay; and 2) due process claims were properly rejected as plaintiffs have no evidence of improper motive in interpreting personnel rules to support their claim that only they or only Republican employees were singled out for the new personnel policy. 

Read Gunville v. Walker, No. 08-1035

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois

Argued January 9, 2009
Decided October 9, 2009

Judges

Before:  Manion, Rovner, and Sykes, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Rovner, Circuit Judge

In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 case against a county including the county sheriff, county jail employees, and a psychiatrist provided by the county jail, arising from the death of plaintiff's brother while detained in jail, district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of all of the defendants is affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part where: 1) district court correctly concluded that the County's policy of requiring a corrections officer to be present during psychiatric examinations at the jail did not violate plaintiff's brother's constitutional right to adequate mental health treatment; 2) summary judgment as to the medical malpractice claim against the treating psychiatrist is reversed and remanded where plaintiff's complaint and brief in opposition to the motion for summary judgment make clear that she also alleges malpractice by the doctor in discontinuing her brother's medication; and 3) because only state law claims now remain in the case, the district court should determine whether the requirements for diversity jurisdiction are satisfied.   

Read Hunter v. Amin, No. 08-3719

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois

Argued May 5, 2009
Decided October 1, 2009

Judges

Before Ripple and Sykes, Circuit Judges, and Lawrence, District Judge

Opinion by Lawrence, District Judge

In plaintiff's case against several defendants arising from a custody case in which the Illinois state court found that she suffered from Munchausen syndrome by proxy, district court's dismissal of her suit is affirmed where: 1) guardians ad litem and court-appointed experts, including psychiatrists, are absolutely immune from liability for damages when they act at the court's direction; 2) no factual allegations tie the defendants, who are private individuals, to a conspiracy with a state actor; and 3) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's Rule 59(e) motion.    

Read Cooney v. Rossiter, No. 08-3675

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Argued August 27, 2009
Decided September 30, 2009

Judges

Before Bauer, Posner, and Wood  Circuit Judges

Opinion by Posner, Circuit Judge