Serrano v Guevara et al
| Armando Serrano |
| Reynaldo Guevara, Ernest Halvorsen, Edward Mingey, Matthew Coghlan, John Dillon, the City of Chicago and Cook County |
| 1:2017cv02869 |
| April 17, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Matthew F. Kennelly |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
289
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. Signed by the Honorable Manish S. Shah on 6/4/2020: Defendants' motions for summary judgment, 200 , 205 , 211 on the Serrano docket, no. 17-cv-2869 and 182 , 187 , and 191 on the Montanez docket, no. 17-c v-4560, are granted in part, denied in part in accordance with this opinion.To summarize, these claims remain: fabrication of evidence against Coghlan, Dillon, Guevara, and Halvorsen based on Vicente's and Wilda's statements; pretrial deten tion against all individual defendants; malicious prosecution against all individual defendants; federal and state-law conspiracy against all individual defendants; Brady claims against Guevara and Halvorsen based on Vicente's statement and Wild a's identifications; intentional infliction of emotional distress against Coghlan, Dillon, Guevara, and Halvorsen; and failure to intervene against Guevara and Halvorsen. Defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the following cl aims along with any corresponding claims based on respondeat superior or indemnification against the City of Chicago or Cook County: fabrication of evidence against Mingey, and fabrication of evidence based on Rankins's statement; Brady claims a gainst the police defendants based on Rankins, Wilda's corroboration, Mingey's notes, and Frank Velez (so no Brady claims against Mingey survive); intentional infliction of emotional distress against Mingey; failure to intervene against Min gey; and any malicious prosecution claim dependent on the prosecutor defendants' lack of knowledge of police misconduct. A status hearing is scheduled for June 18, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. [For further detail see attached order.] Notices mailed. (psm, )
|
|
Filing
88
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. Signed by the Honorable Manish S. Shah on 5/29/2018: The County's motion to dismiss 59 and the City's motion to dismiss 68 are granted in part, denied in part. The dismissals are without prejudice unless otherwise noted. Plaintiffs have permission to file amended complaints curing the pleading deficiencies described in this opinion. Amended complaints must be filed by June 19, 2018, and responses to any amended complaints are due by July 10, 2018. A status hearing is set for July 19, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. [For further detail see attached order.] Notices mailed. (psm, )
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
