The opinion of the court was delivered by: AMY J. ST. EVE, District Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Jane Doe ("Daughter"), John Doe ("Son"), and Carla
Saulsbury filed an amended complaint against Defendants County of
Kankakee ("County"), Sheriff Timothy Bukowski ("Sheriff"),
Charles Curwick, Chad Gessner, and others, alleging excessive
force by County, Sheriff, and others in violation of
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Count I), false arrest by County and others in violation of
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Count II), discrimination in rental housing by
County, Curwick, and others in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604
(Count III), neglect to prevent violation by County, Sheriff,
Curwick and others in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1986 (Count IV),
conspiracy by County, Sheriff, Curwick and others in violation of
42 U.S.C. § 1985 (Count V), common law battery by County,
Sheriff, and others (Count VI), intentional infliction of
emotional distress by County, Sheriff, and others (Count VII),
negligent supervision, hiring, and promotion by County, Sheriff,
Curwick, and others (Count VIII), and failure to train and
discipline by County, Sheriff, and others in violation of
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Count IX). These allegations arise mainly from
events on December 4, 2002 and January 1, 2003. (R. 17-1, Am.
Compl. ¶¶ 54-71.) Defendants County, Sheriff, Curwick, and Gessner (collectively "the County
Defendants") have moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant
to Rule 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated herein, Defendants'
motion is granted in part and denied in part.
This Court takes the following allegations from the amended
complaint as true for the purposes of the motion to dismiss.
Hishon v. King & Spaulding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984).
Plaintiffs Daughter and Son are minors and children of
Plaintiff Saulsbury. (R. 17-1, Am. Compl. 6.) Plaintiffs live in
a collection of apartment buildings known as Crestlane
Apartments, located in Kankakee, Illinois (the "Complex"). (Id.
¶ 5, 31.) Defendant County is a body politic and corporate in the
State of Illinois, and Defendants Sheriff, Curwick, and Gessner
are law enforcement officers employed by Defendant County's
sheriff's department. (Id. ¶¶ 8-9; R. 26-1, Pls.' Mem. in Opp'n
to Mots. to Dismiss at 1-2.) Other Defendants named in the
lawsuit include the City of Kankakee ("City"); Michael Kinkade,
the Chief of Police of Defendant City ("Chief"); Donald Green,
the Mayor of the City ("Mayor"); Austin Bank of Chicago
("Trust"), the owner of the Complex; and Crestview Village
Apartments, L.P., the management firm for the Complex
("Manager"). (Id. ¶¶ 10-15.) Defendant Kankakee Area
Metropolitan Enforcement Group ("KAMEG") is a joint venture of
municipalities and is composed of members of law enforcement from
both the City and County including, but not limited to,
Defendants Sheriff, Curwick, Gessner. (Id. ¶¶ 9, 16-17.)
Finally, Plaintiffs have designated as Unknown Defendants any
additional potential defendants arising from the events of
December 4, 2002 whose identity may become known in the future.
(Id. ¶ 21.)
I. Crestlane Apartment Complex
The Complex consists of multiple residential units in several
buildings and has at least three open areas, a playground, parking lot, and several common
areas used by residents and their acquaintances. (Id. ¶¶
31-34.) Most of the tenants of the Complex receive support from
the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
(Id. ¶ 35.) Most residents of the Complex are African-American.
(Id. ¶ 36.)
II. Law Enforcement at the Complex
The main purpose of KAMEG is to combat the illegal drug trade
and other crimes occurring in local jurisdictions. (Id. ¶ 38.)
KAMEG has, through policy and procedure, used aggressive methods
of law enforcement, including the prohibition of loitering for
lawful purposes, conducting arrests without probable cause or
warrant, random searches, and excessive force in making arrests.
(Id. ¶¶ 39, 44, 52.) KAMEG employed these practices in
low-income housing throughout the area, including the Complex.
(Id. ¶ 39.)
On January 1, 2000, Defendant City entered into an agreement
("Agency Agreement") with Defendants Trust and Manager giving
authority to Defendant City to control any non-residents found in
the common areas of the Complex. (Id., Ex. A.) Defendant City
executed other agreements of this type with rental housing units
in the City of Kankakee. (Id. ¶ 50.)
III. Plaintiffs' Injuries
On December 4, 2002 around 8:00 p.m., Daughter, Son, other
residents, and guests were located in a hallway near Plaintiffs'
apartment when they observed several KAMEG officers enter and
instruct at least three persons to leave the common area. (Id.
¶ 57-58.) The officers attacked one man as he attempted to
produce identification. (Id. ¶ 59.) While this was occurring,
one or more officers threatened Plaintiff Daughter and instructed
her not to move. (Id. ¶ 60.) At least one officer then
discharged pepper spray in Daughter's vicinity, affecting her
eyes, balance, and breathing. (Id. ¶ 61.) Son, seeking to avoid
the pepper spray, entered Plaintiffs' apartment and there encountered an unknown man whom
the officers had placed in the apartment. (Id. ¶ 62, 67.)
Plaintiffs Son and Daughter suffered pain and emotional
distress during the attack and since the incident have suffered
from emotional distress and increased difficulty in feeling
secure in their home. (Id. ¶¶ 64, 68.) Additionally, the
incident impacted Plaintiff Daughter's relationships with friends
and in school. (Id. ¶ 65.)
Finally, the amended complaint alleges the presence of at least
one law enforcement officer at an incident on January 1, 2003
during which someone was detained, interrogated, and searched
outside of Plaintiffs' apartment. (Id. ¶¶ 16, 84.) The amended
complaint does not, however, allege the specific names of those
present nor does it allege the presence of or harm to any of the
Plaintiffs. Only in subsequent pleadings is Defendant Gessner's
name specifically connected with the incident on that date.
(19-2, Defs.' Mem. in Supp. of Their Mot. ...