Case: Vergara v. Dal Ponte

1:15-cv-02407 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: March 19, 2015

Closed Date: Dec. 30, 2019

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On March 19, 2015, three men arrested in Chicago, IL filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs sued the City of Chicago and Chicago police officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiffs, represented by a private firm, asked the court for compensatory and punitive damages. They claimed that the City of Chicago and police officers violated their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that Chicago police officers had subjected them to false arrest at the Homan Square detention facility, excessive use of force, and illegal searches; attempted to coerce them into false confessions without an attorney present; and threatened them that they would be charged with crimes if they did not provide information.

The Guardian, a UK-based newspaper, profiled conditions in Homan Square through a series of articles starting in early 2015. Documents filed later in this case mention that the press coverage inspired the plaintiffs to come forward with this lawsuit.

On May 13, 2015, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Primarily, the defendants claimed that plaintiffs' complaint was untimely and that the allegation that the police had threatened plaintiffs into not speaking about their experience was not enough to defeat the statute of limitations. On May 27, 2015, Judge Andrea R. Wood granted the defendants' motion to stay discovery pending the resolution of the motion to dismiss.

On March 31, 2016, Judge Wood granted the defendants' motion to dismiss in a minute order. However, Judge Wood did not issue a Memorandum Opinion and Order on the motion to dismiss until January 31, 2018. The docket does not explain the reason for this large gap in time. Given the unusual gap without a written dismissal order, the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(7)(A)(ii) dictates that a dismissal order is assumed to be filed 150 days after judgment is entered into the docket.

In the opinion, Judge Wood held that the case should be dismissed because the complaint was filed after the statute of limitations had expired and the doctrine of equitable estoppel did not apply to the circumstances. Specifically, Judge Wood held that although the plaintiffs adequately alleged facts establishing the first two elements of equitable estoppel—that the defendants acted affirmatively to prevent them from filing suit and the plaintiffs did actually and reasonably rely on the threats while they were made—the plaintiffs did not file suit promptly after the obstacle to filing was removed and therefore failed to adequately allege facts establishing the third element of equitable estoppel.

On February 6, 2018, the plaintiffs appealed Judge's Wood decision granting the defendants' motion to dismiss to the Seventh Circuit. On August 17, 2018, the defendants submitted a docketing statement arguing that the plaintiffs failed to file a timely notice of appeal as required by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(7)(A)(ii). They argued that the district court entered a dispositive order on the docket on March 31, 2016, meaning that the plaintiffs' notice of appeal filed on February 6, 2018 was more than 30 days after the entry of judgment.

A Seventh Circuit panel composed of Judges Daniel Anthony Manion, Diane S. Skyes, and Michael B. Brennan sided with the appellees in a September 30, 2019 opinion. 939 F.3d 882. They wrote that the appellants should have filed their motion to appeal within 30 days of the dismissal order, which came 150 days after the March 30, 2016 minute order dismissing the case. They did not agree with the plaintiff's argument that they should have been allowed to appeal when the written opinion was published. In addition, the panel briefly discussed the merits of the case, and wrote that this case was not filed within the statute of limitations and that equitable estoppel did not apply. They referred back to previous cases in the Seventh Circuit that held that police intimidation was not sufficient to invoke equitable estoppel, and added that the Guardian articles providing "a newfound sense of security" to come forward was not enough to overcome that precedent, either.

The plaintiffs did not appeal the decision to the Supreme Court; the case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Eva Richardson (1/12/2019)

Kat Brausch (3/20/2016)

Ellen Aldin (6/12/2020)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4262816/parties/vergara-v-dal-ponte/

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Amouyal, Kara Brooke (Illinois)

Fay, Katherine Tapie (Illinois)

Horwitz, Blake Wolfe (Illinois)

Attorney for Defendant

Cazares, Jorge V. (Illinois)

Cifonelli, Jonathan Booker (Illinois)

Judge(s)

Sykes, Diane S. (Wisconsin)

Wood, Andrea Robin (Illinois)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Amouyal, Kara Brooke (Illinois)

Fay, Katherine Tapie (Illinois)

Horwitz, Blake Wolfe (Illinois)

Attorney for Defendant

Cazares, Jorge V. (Illinois)

Cifonelli, Jonathan Booker (Illinois)

Jones, Walter Jr. (Illinois)

Steiner, Rachel C. (Illinois)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

1:15-cv-02407	Docket [PACER]	Oct. 22, 2019	Oct. 22, 2019 Docket
1 1:15-cv-02407	Complaint	March 19, 2015	March 19, 2015 Complaint
47 1:15-cv-02407	Memorandum Opinion and Order	Jan. 31, 2018	Jan. 31, 2018 Order/Opinion
00713506111 1:15-cv-02407 18-01266	Opinion Vergara v. City of Chicago U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit	Oct. 22, 2019	Oct. 22, 2019 Order/Opinion 939 F.3d 882

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4262816/vergara-v-dal-ponte/

Last updated Sept. 29, 2026, 5:12 a.m.

Docket for: Vergara v. Dal Ponte

ECF Number	Date	Description	Link
1	March 19, 2015	COMPLAINT filed by John Vergara, Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-10459698.(Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 03/19/2015)	RECAP
2	March 19, 2015	CIVIL Cover Sheet (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 03/19/2015)	RECAP
3	March 19, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara by Blake Wolfe Horwitz (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 03/19/2015)	RECAP
4	March 20, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Initial status hearing set for 5/27/2015 at 9:00 AM. The parties are directed to meet and conduct a planning conference pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). At least seven days before the initial status hearing, the parties shall file a joint written status report, not to exceed five pages in length. The initial status report shall provide the information described on the Court's website at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under District Judges, Judge Andrea R. Wood, Initial Status Conference. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 03/20/2015)	RECAP
	March 20, 2015	CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Andrea R. Wood. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila Finnegan. (aee, )
	March 20, 2015	SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants City of Chicago, J. V. Dal Ponte, P. J. Nigro, B. Srisutch (pg, )
5	March 25, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara by Blake Wolfe Horwitz (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 03/25/2015)	RECAP
6	March 25, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara by Katherine Tapie Fay AMENDED (Fay, Katherine) (Entered: 03/25/2015)	RECAP
7	March 26, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara by Kara Brooke Amouyal (Amouyal, Kara) (Entered: 03/26/2015)	RECAP
8	April 13, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City of Chicago, B. Srisutch by Walter Jones, Jr (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 04/13/2015)	RECAP
9	April 13, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City of Chicago, B. Srisutch by Jorge V. Cazares (Cazares, Jorge) (Entered: 04/13/2015)	RECAP
10	April 13, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City of Chicago, B. Srisutch by Jonathan Booker Cifonelli (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/13/2015)	RECAP
11	April 13, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City of Chicago, B. Srisutch by Rachel C. Steiner (Steiner, Rachel) (Entered: 04/13/2015)	RECAP
12	April 13, 2015	MOTION by Defendants City of Chicago, B. Srisutch for extension of time to file answer regarding complaint 1 (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/13/2015)	RECAP
13	April 13, 2015	NOTICE of Motion by Jonathan Booker Cifonelli for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer, motion for relief 12 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 4/16/2015 at 09:15 AM. (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/13/2015)	RECAP
14	April 14, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Motion Hearing set for 4/16/2015 at 9:15 AM 13 is stricken and reset for 4/16/2015 at 9:00 AM. TIME CHANGE ONLY. In the future, defendants must comply with the specified date and time of motion hearings. The days and times on which particular judges hear motions is available online at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/home/judges/JudgesMotionSchedule.aspx. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 04/14/2015)	RECAP
15	April 15, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Defendants City of Chicago and Officer Srisuth Motion for extension of time to answer 12 is granted. The deadline for Defendants City of Chicago and Officer Srisuth to answer or otherwise plead to Plaintiff's complaint is extended to 5/13/2015. The motion presentment date of 4/16/2015 is stricken. Parties need not appear. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 04/15/2015)	RECAP
16	April 30, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant J. V. Dal Ponte by Walter Jones, Jr (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 04/30/2015)	RECAP
17	April 30, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant J. V. Dal Ponte by Jorge V. Cazares (Cazares, Jorge) (Entered: 04/30/2015)	RECAP
18	April 30, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant J. V. Dal Ponte by Jonathan Booker Cifonelli (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/30/2015)	RECAP
19	April 30, 2015	MOTION by Defendant J. V. Dal Ponte for extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/30/2015)	RECAP
20	April 30, 2015	NOTICE of Motion by Jonathan Booker Cifonelli for presentment of extension of time 19 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 5/6/2015 at 09:00 AM. (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/30/2015)	RECAP
21	May 5, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Defendant Dal Ponte's unopposed motion for extension of time to answer or otherwise plead 19 is granted. The deadline for Defendant Ponte to answer or otherwise plead to Plaintiff's complaint is extended to 5/13/2015. The motion presentment date of 5/6/2015 is stricken. Parties need not appear. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 05/05/2015)	RECAP
22	May 13, 2015	MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 05/13/2015)	RECAP
23	May 13, 2015	NOTICE of Motion by Walter Jones, Jr for presentment of Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 22 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 5/19/2015 at 09:00 AM. (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 05/13/2015)	RECAP
24	May 18, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant P. J. Nigro by Jorge V. Cazares (Cazares, Jorge) (Entered: 05/18/2015)	RECAP
25	May 18, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant P. J. Nigro by Walter Jones, Jr (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 05/18/2015)	RECAP
26	May 18, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant P. J. Nigro by Jonathan Booker Cifonelli (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 05/18/2015)	RECAP
27	May 18, 2015	ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants J. V. Dal Ponte, P. J. Nigro by Rachel C. Steiner (Steiner, Rachel) (Entered: 05/18/2015)	RECAP
28	May 19, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Motion hearing held. Plaintiffs shall respond to Defendant's motion to dismiss 22 by 6/9/2015. Defendants shall reply thereto by 6/23/2015. The initial status hearing set for 5/27/2015 4 remains firm. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 05/20/2015)	RECAP
29	May 20, 2015	STATUS Report JOINT by Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 05/20/2015)	RECAP
30	May 22, 2015	MOTION by Defendants City of Chicago, J. V. Dal Ponte, P. J. Nigro, B. Srisutch to stay Discovery Pending Resolution of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint With Prejudice (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 05/22/2015)	RECAP
31	May 22, 2015	NOTICE of Motion by Walter Jones, Jr for presentment of motion to stay 30 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 5/28/2015 at 09:00 AM. (Jones, Walter) (Entered: 05/22/2015)	RECAP
32	May 27, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Status hearing held. Defendants' Motion to Stay 30 is granted. Discovery is stayed pending the resolution of the Motion to Dismiss. Hearing set for 5/28/15 is stricken. Plaintiffs' oral motion to withdraw as counsel is granted. Attorney Katherine Fay is granted leave to withdraw her appearance on behalf of Plaintiffs. Status hearing set for 8/6/15 at 9:00 a.m. Mailed notice (ep, ) (Entered: 05/27/2015)	RECAP
33	June 8, 2015	RESPONSE by Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergarain Opposition to MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 22 (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 06/08/2015)	RECAP
34	June 23, 2015	REPLY by City of Chicago, J. V. Dal Ponte, P. J. Nigro, B. Srisutch to response in opposition to motion 33 (Cifonelli, Jonathan) (Entered: 06/23/2015)	RECAP
35	July 23, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: On the Court's own motion, the status hearing set for 8/6/2015 is stricken and reset for 8/18/2015 at 09:00 AM. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 07/23/2015)	RECAP
36	Aug. 17, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: On the Court's own motion, the status hearing set for 8/18/2015 is stricken and reset for 10/7/2015 at 09:00 AM. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 08/17/2015)	RECAP
37	Oct. 6, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: On the Court's on motion, the status hearing set for 10/7/2015 is stricken and reset for 10/21/2015 at 09:00 AM. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 10/06/2015)	RECAP
38	Oct. 20, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: On the Court's on motion, the status hearing set for 10/21/2015 is stricken and reset for 11/20/2015 at 09:00 AM. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 10/20/2015)	RECAP
39	Nov. 20, 2015	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Status hearing set for 11/20/2015 at 9:00 AM is stricken. The Court's ruling on Defendants' motion to dismiss 22 to follow by separate order. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 11/20/2015)	RECAP
40	Jan. 13, 2016	MOTION by Plaintiffs Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara for discovery LIFT STAY OF DISCOVERY AND LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K)(Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 01/13/2016) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER 3 Exhibit C View on PACER 4 Exhibit D View on PACER 5 Exhibit E View on PACER 6 Exhibit F View on PACER 7 Exhibit G View on PACER 8 Exhibit H View on PACER 9 Exhibit I View on PACER 10 Exhibit J View on PACER 11 Exhibit K View on PACER	RECAP
41	Jan. 13, 2016	NOTICE of Motion by Blake Wolfe Horwitz for presentment of motion for discovery, 40 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 1/19/2016 at 09:00 AM. (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 01/13/2016)	RECAP
42	Jan. 19, 2016	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Plaintiffs' motion to lift stay of discovery and for leave to file first amended complaint 40 is taken under advisement along with Defendants' motion to dismiss 22 . No further briefing is required at this time. The Court will rule on the pending motions before the end of the week. The motion presentment hearing set for 1/19/2016 is stricken. Parties need not appear. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 01/19/2016)	RECAP
43	March 31, 2016	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion and Order to follow, the Defendants Motion to Dismiss 22 is granted. Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiffs' motion to lift stay of discovery and for leave to file and amended complaint 40 is denied as moot. Mailed notice(aw, ) (Entered: 03/31/2016)	RECAP
	March 31, 2016	Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim AND Order on Motion for Discovery
44	May 31, 2016	MOTION by Attorney Rachel C. Steiner to withdraw as attorney for City of Chicago, J. V. Dal Ponte, P. J. Nigro, B. Srisutch. No party information provided (Steiner, Rachel) (Entered: 05/31/2016)	RECAP
45	May 31, 2016	NOTICE of Motion by Rachel C. Steiner for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney 44 before Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 6/2/2016 at 09:00 AM. (Steiner, Rachel) (Entered: 05/31/2016)	RECAP
46	June 1, 2016	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Motion by counsel to withdraw as attorney 44 is granted. Attorney Rachel C. Steiner is withdrawn as counsel of record for Defendants. The motion presentment date of 6/2/2016 is stricken. Parties need not appear. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 06/01/2016)	RECAP
47	Jan. 31, 2018	MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Andrea R. Wood on 1/31/2018.Mailed notice(ef, )	RECAP
48	Jan. 31, 2018	MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Consistent with the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order, Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted, Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed with prejudice, and the Clerk of Court is directed to enter Judgment in favor of Defendants. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (ef, ) (Entered: 01/31/2018)	RECAP
49	Jan. 31, 2018	ENTERED JUDGMENT. Mailed notice(ef, ) (Entered: 01/31/2018)	RECAP
50	Feb. 6, 2018	NOTICE of appeal by Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara regarding orders 49, 47 Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0752-14093994. (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 02/06/2018)	RECAP
51	Feb. 6, 2018	DOCKETING Statement by Jose Garcia, Carlos Ruiz, John Vergara regarding notice of appeal 50 (Horwitz, Blake) (Entered: 02/06/2018)	RECAP
52	Feb. 7, 2018	NOTICE of Appeal Due letter sent to counsel of record regarding notice of appeal 50 (ek, ) (Entered: 02/07/2018)	RECAP
53	Feb. 7, 2018	TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on notice of appeal 50 . Notified counsel (ek, ) (Entered: 02/07/2018)	RECAP
54	Feb. 7, 2018	ACKNOWLEDGMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal 50 ; USCA Case No. 18-1266. (ph, ) (Entered: 02/07/2018)	RECAP