Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cooper v. Dailey

March 31, 2010

MARKEE COOPER, SR., ZION COOPER AND, MARKEE COOPER, JR., BY AND THROUGH THEIR PARENTS AND GUARDIANS MARKEE COOPER, SR. AND SHENITA COOPER, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CHICAGO POLICE OFFICERS S. DAILEY, NO. 10890, M. BONNSTETTER, NO. 15963, F. MACK, NO. 198404, J. FRANO, NO. 11772, R. PUCILLO, NO. 16850, W. JOHNSON, NO. 17442, A. MONACO, NO. 19253, S. LAURETTO, NO. 5882, V. FICO, NO. 6284, L. WILLEMS, NO. 7394, M. NAPOLI, NO. 9560, S. REINA, NO. 2622, D. ROSS, NO. 177, G. DE SALVO, NO. 218, AND THE CITY OF CHICAGO DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Markee Cooper, Sr., individually and on behalf of his minor sons Zion and Markee, Jr., filed a first amended complaint [56] asserting claims under Illinois state law and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Chicago and fourteen individual Chicago police officers (the "Defendant Officers").*fn1 All of Plaintiffs'claims arise out of the February 17, 2007 search of Plaintiffs'home by the Defendant Officers, which was conducted pursuant to two search warrants issued based on information that Defendants contend was provided by a confidential informant.

Currently before the Court is Plaintiffs'motion for partial summary judgment [101] as to liability on Count V, which asserts a Section 1983 claim alleging that the search violated Plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment rights.*fn2 For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs' summary judgment is denied.

Motion for Partial

I. Background

The Court takes the relevant facts primarily from the parties'Local Rule ("L.R.") 56.1 statements*fn3 Plaintiffs' Statement of Facts ("Pl. SOF") [102], Defendants'Response to Plaintiffs' Statement of Facts ("Def. Resp.") [126], Defendants'Statement of Additional Facts ("Def. SOAF") [123], and Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants'

Statement of Additional Facts (Pl. Resp. [131].

On February 16, 2007, Defendant Officer Sean Dailey swore out two complaints for warrants to search 1015 N. Laramie. Pl. SOF ¶ 8. In the first complaint, Dailey requested a warrant to search the basement apartment of 1015 N. Laramie for drugs and an individual named Lawrence Tolliver. Def. Resp. ¶ 10; Ex. 15 to Pl. SOF (complaint). Dailey stated in the complaint that, on February 16, 2007, a confidential informant told Dailey that he -- the informant -- had purchased "rocks" (crack cocaine) from an individual known as Lawrence Tolliver from a basement apartment at 1015 N. Laramie on several occasions over the prior three months, including on that day. Def. Resp. ¶¶ 10, 14. According to the complaint, Dailey drove the informant past 1015 N. Laramie, at which time the informant positively identified the building as the location of the basement apartment where he had purchased drugs from Tolliver. Ex. 15 to Pl. SOF (complaint). Dailey stated in the complaint that he had known the informant for two years, and that the informant previously had provided reliable information concerning narcotics activity, which had led to the recovery of illegal narcotics on three occasions. Pl. SOF ¶ 11; Def. Resp. ¶ 12. The first complaint resulted in Search Warrant 07SW4512 authorizing the search of the basement apartment of 1015 N. Laramie. Pl. SOF ¶ 9; Ex. 15 to Pl. SOF.

In the second complaint, Dailey requested a warrant to search the second floor apartment of 1015 N. Laramie for drugs and an individual with the nickname Guy. Def. Resp. ¶ 10; Ex. 15 to Pl. SOF (complaint). Dailey relied on information provided by the same confidential informant discussed in the first complaint. According to the second complaint, in their February 16, 2007 conversation, the informant told Dailey that he -- the informant -- had purchased crack from Guy from the second floor apartment at 1015 N. Laramie on several occasions over the prior three months, including on that day. Def. Resp. ¶¶ 23-25. The second complaint resulted in Search Warrant 07SW4513 authorizing the search of the second floor apartment of 1015 N. Laramie. Pl. SOF ¶ 9; Ex. 15 to Pl. SOF.

Defendant Officer Marvin Bonnstetter also met with the informant on February 16, 2007, prior to the filing of the warrant applications. Pl. SOF ¶ 30. According to Bonnstetter, the informant told the officers that 1015 N. Laramie "was like a party house or something," and that there were no children in the building. Pl. SOF ¶¶ 32-33.

At approximately 6 p.m. on February 17, 2007 there was a team meeting regarding the execution of the 1015 N. Laramie search warrants. Pl. SOF ¶ 47. At that briefing, Dailey described what was expected to be found in the home. Pl. SOF ¶ 49. The fourteen Defendant Officers then proceeded to 1015 N. Laramie to execute the search warrants. Pl. SOF ¶ 56.

Officer Dailey entered the building first and went to the basement with approximately half of the other officers. Pl. SOF ¶ 57. The remaining officers went upstairs to the second floor apartment. Pl. SOF ¶ 57. The officers who went to the basement observed that it was unfinished and appeared to be used for storage and laundry. Reina Dep. at 29-30. Sergeant Salvatore Reina stated in his deposition that the basement was not what he expected based on the search warrant, as he understood that "there was supposed to be someone living downstairs."Id. at 30. Officer Dailey testified that the basement "didn' t appear to be an apartment." Dailey Dep. 87. The officers did not observe any evidence of drugs in the basement. Pl. SOF ¶ 60.

The officers who went upstairs learned almost immediately upon entering the second floor apartment that it was occupied by Chicago police officer Markee Cooper, Sr. and his family, including two children -- Zion and Markee, Jr. --and two grown women. Pl. SOF ¶¶ 62, 64-65; Def. SOAF ¶ 10. Upon learning that the second floor apartment belonged to a police officer, Officer Napoli told the officers in the basement and first floor to stop the search, which they did. Pl. SOF ¶ 66.

Lieutenant Dennis Ross, who was the supervisor on the warrant execution, and Sergeant Reina informed Plaintiffs why they were there, and asked Markee and Shenita Cooper about Lawrence Tolliver. Pl. SOF ¶ 67; Def. SOAF ¶ 11. Officer Cooper responded that he did not know anyone by the name of Tolliver. Pl. SOF ¶ 68. According to Lieutenant Ross and Sergeant Reina, shortly thereafter, Shenita Cooper said that she recalled getting mail for a person by the name of Tolliver. Def. SOAF ¶ 13. At that point, Officer Cooper recalled that detectives previously had come to the apartment looking for a Lawrence Tolliver. Lieutenant Ross and Sergeant Reina testified that Officer Cooper said the detectives had stopped by about two months earlier. Def. SOAF ¶ 13. At his deposition, Officer Cooper stated that he told the officers that a detective looking for Lawrence Tolliver had come to the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.