Date: 12-02-2012

Case Style: Pares Ratliff v. Brian Murphy and James Carroll

Case Number: 1:10-cv-00739

Judge: Robert M. Dow, Jr.

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Cook County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Jared Samuel Kosoglad, Michael D. Oppenheimer and Bruce Eli Mosbacher

Defendant's Attorney: Richard Thomas Sikes, Jr. and Jeffrey James Scolaro

Description: Plaintiff contended that on June 17, 2009, he drove to the gas station at the corner of Chicago Ave. and Lorel Ave. to fill his rear driver’s side tire with air. Plaintiff contended that the Defendant Officers approached him and arrested him for aggravated assault without probable cause. Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant Officers parked Plaintiff’s car on Lorel Avenue and that the car was stolen during the time that Plaintiff was processed for his arrest. Additionally, Plaintiff contended that the Defendant Officers did not appear for the court date set regarding the arrest. Plaintiff proceeded to trial on four claims: 1) state claim of false arrest against both officers, 2) malicious prosecution against all defendants, 3) illegal search of Ratliff’s person against both officers, and 4) illegal search of Ratliff’s vehicle against both officers.

On June 17, 2009, Officers Brian Murphy and Jim Carroll were working as partners in a gang tactical unit. They were assigned to a general territory of Area 5. Ratliff parked his car near the air machine at the gas station and walked inside the station. (A gas station surveillance video has captured the arrest, but most of the critical action was obstructed by gas station pumps and pillars.) As Ratliff returned to his vehicle, two young men appeared to approach Ratliff and his vehicle. At the same time, Officers Carroll and Murphy passed the gas station in an unmarked vehicle. Officer Carroll, observing the individuals approaching Ratliff, asked Officer Murphy to turn the vehicle around. When the Defendant Officers returned and pulled into the station, two men were talking to Ratliff by his vehicle and the air hose machine. As the officers’ vehicle approached and Defendant Officer Carroll began to exit the same, Ratliff turned away from the officers and bent over his right rear vehicle tire.

Officer Carroll, having suspected that Ratliff was attempting to hide something, approached Ratliff, identified himself as an officer, and stated that he would like to speak with Ratliff. Ratliff did not respond, but Officer Carroll noticed that Plaintiff was holding an air hose (a four-inch metal piece attached to thick rubber tubing) in his hand. Officer Carroll asked Ratliff to drop the air hose and Ratliff again ignored Officer Carroll. Officer Carroll then reached for the air hose, when Ratliff pulled his hand and the hose away from Officer Carroll, and clenched the hose tightly. Ratliff then stated, “Let me finish filling my tire or I’m going to kill you.”

At that point, the Officers, having both heard the threat, placed Ratliff under arrest for aggravated assault of a peace officer. While placing him under arrest, Ratliff was searched incident to the arrest and nothing illegal was found on his person. Ratliff testified that he allowed Officer Murphy to get his wallet from under the driver side seat of his vehicle. Officer Murphy retrieved the wallet from the car. Officer Carroll then provided Ratliff with options regarding his vehicle: 1) have it towed, 2) one of the officers could drive it to the station, or 3) it could be parked on the street at the scene of the arrest. Officer Carroll and Murphy testified that Ratliff chose to have it parked on the street. The surveillance video confirmed that it was then parked on the street.

On the drive to District 15 for processing for the aggravated assault, Ratliff stated to the officers that he was a Vice Lord in response to their inquiry about gang affiliation. The Case Incident Report was filled out noting the threat to Officer Carroll and probable cause was approved by commanding officers. Ratliff was processed and released on iBond. Officer Carroll and Officer Murphy were not notified of Ratliff’s court date on the computerized notification system of the Chicago Police Department and, therefore, Ratliff’s case was dismissed.

Ratliff claimed damages related to the cost of the vehicle, claimed damages that he specifically lost a position with the Cook County Sheriff’s Department as a result of the arrest, that he was embarrassed and depressed due to the arrest, and that he lost wages from his shift at Jewel on the night of the incident.

Outcome: Plaintiff's verdict for $50,000.75 including $30,000 in compensatory damages, $20,000 on punitive damages and 75 cents that Plaintiff paid to air up the tire.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: John Unger commented as follows: It is important for you to include the statement on the bottom of page 1 that judge Haynes did not join in section 1b of the opinion and also to include judge Higgenbotham's dissent because taken together this means section 1b is not part of the majority opinion which it would appear to be as your posting now reads.