Cage v. City Of Chicago et al

Plaintiff: Dean Cage
Defendant: City Of Chicago and Andrew Jones
Case Number: 1:2009cv03078
Filed: May 21, 2009
Court: Illinois Northern District Court
Office: Chicago Office
County: Cook
Presiding Judge: Virginia M. Kendall
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
September 24, 2013 252 Opinion or Order of the Court Enter MEMORANDUM, OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, Defendants Motion to Bar the Testimony of Gary Harmor is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, Harmors opinions pertaining to the use of the term extract, the periphery theory, and DQ Alpha testing will be admitted; his estimate of the degradation rate of DNA in sperm cells over the relevant time period and his opinion regarding the amount of DNA that would have been present on the underwear sample in 1995 will be barred. Defendants Joint Motion No. 1 to Bar Plaintiffs Expert, Charles Alan Keels, Testimony and Opinions is denied. Defendants Joint Motion No. 2 to Bar Plaintiffs Expert, Charles Alan Keels Testimony Regarding Defendant Pam Fishs Alleged Fraudul ent Intent/Credibility in Testifying Concerning Serological Analysis Performed in Unrelated Criminal Cases is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, Keel will not be permitted to offer opinion testimony pertaining to the accuracy of Fishs trial testimony in prior criminal cases or whether that testimony would have misled a reasonable investigator, attorney, or finder of fact; any opinion testimony by Keel that Fishs laboratory reports in those cases misrepresented her underlying data and bench notes is proper and not barred. The Court denies Cages Motion to bar opinion testimony from Lucy Davis that Fish acted appropriately in reporting her ABO test results as inconclusive in the Illinois v. Willis case. The Court grants Cages Motion to bar opinion testimony from Barry Spector that Zilingers deposition testimony indicates that she did not put her underwear on after being attacked. Defendants Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Dr. Brian L. Cutler is denied. Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/24/2013.Mailed notice(tsa, )
November 14, 2012 204 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 11/14/2012.Mailed notice(tsa, )
September 8, 2010 66 Opinion or Order of the Court Motion 49 is denied; WRITTEN Opinion Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/8/2010.(tsa, )

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Cage v. City Of Chicago et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dean Cage
Represented By: Daniel Moore Twetten
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City Of Chicago
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Andrew Jones
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?