Case: Mann v. Ramaglia

On October 19, 2015, three African American men who had been unlawfully arrested and detained in Chicago filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs sued the City of Chicago and six individual police officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Represented by the People’s Law Office, the plaintiffs asked the court for compensatory and punitive damages. The plaintiffs claimed that the City of Chicago and the individual police officers violated their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the police officers falsely arrested them, illegally detained and coercively interrogated them in Homan Square, fabricated evidence, withheld exculpatory evidence, wrote false reports, and committed perjury during hearings and trials.

On January 11, 2016, the defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The defendants claimed that the plaintiffs' complaint was insufficiently specific as to several counts, particularly the fabrication of evidence and the withholding of exculpatory evidence.

On July 19, 2016, Judge Ronald A. Guzman granted in part and denied in part the defendants' partial motion to dismiss. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' Brady claim with prejudice, as well as one of the plaintiff's excessive force claims against one police officer. Additionally, the court dismissed the plaintiffs’ due process claim relating to the fabrication of evidence and their claim for civil conspiracy without prejudice. The court gave the plaintiffs 21 days to replead the two claims dismissed without prejudice.

On August 9, 2016, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.

Meanwhile, the case was consolidated with Perez v. Chicago, also in this Clearinghouse, for purposes of discovery. Following several months of discovery, defendants in this case filed a motion to bifurcate the plaintiffs' Monell claim from the other claims in the case and to stay discovery and trial on the other claims on January 31, 2017. On February 1, 2017, the Magistrate Judge Mary M. Rowland denied the motion with respect to bifurcating the Monell claims for discovery and denied without prejudice with respect to bifurcating the Monell claims for trial (holding that the decision about bifurcating for trial was for District Judge Guzman to make).

Following more than a year of discovery, the parties began settlement discussions in August of 2018. On September 24, 2018, the court held a settlement conference and the parties reached an agreement. The agreement was not filed before the court and so the contents of it are unknown. On November 8, 2018, the Court dismissed the case without prejudice, which automatically converted to dismissal with prejudice after 75 days. Each party was responsible for its own costs and attorneys' fees. This case is now closed.