United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Calabrese brings this suit against four members of the Cook
County State's Attorney Office, the City of Des Plaines,
five Des Plaines police officers, and the Director of the
Illinois State Police, alleging violations of the federal and
state constitutions in connection with his arrest,
prosecution, and conviction for violating an order of
protection. Doc. 156. After Calabrese twice amended his
complaint, Docs. 5, 37, the court stayed the suit under the
Younger doctrine pending resolution of his state
criminal trial. Doc. 62. While the suit was stayed, Calabrese
sought and was granted leave to file a third amended
complaint. Docs. 81, 83. The court lifted the stay after
Calabrese was convicted, and granted him leave to file a
fourth amended complaint. Docs. 147, 156.
State's Attorney Defendants move under Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss all claims against them,
the Des Plaines Defendants move under Rule 12(b)(6) to
dismiss some of the claims against them and also under Rule
12(f) to strike Calabrese's request for punitive damages
against the City, and the Director moves under Rules 12(b)(1)
and 12(b)(6) to dismiss the claim against him. Docs. 152,
154, 179. The State's Attorney Defendants' motion is
granted, though in part on standing grounds, the
Director's motion is denied, and the Des Plaines
Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part.
The case will go forward on Count IV (brought under the
Second Amendment) against the Director, and on Counts V and
VII (brought under the Fourth Amendment) against the Des
resolving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court assumes the truth
of the operative complaint's well-pleaded factual
allegations, though not its legal conclusions. See Zahn
v. N. Am. Power & Gas, LLC, 815 F.3d 1082, 1087 (7th
Cir. 2016). The court must also consider “documents
attached to the complaint, documents that are critical to the
complaint and referred to in it, and information that is
subject to proper judicial notice, ” along with
additional facts set forth in Calabrese's brief opposing
dismissal, so long as those additional facts “are
consistent with the pleadings.” Phillips v.
Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 714 F.3d 1017, 1020 (7th
Cir. 2013). The facts are set forth as favorably to Calabrese
as those materials allow. See Pierce v. Zoetis,
Inc., 818 F.3d 274, 277 (7th Cir. 2016). In setting
forth those facts at the pleading stage, the court does not
vouch for their accuracy. See Jay E. Hayden Found. v.
First Neighbor Bank, N.A., 610 F.3d 382, 384 (7th Cir.
getting to Calabrese's allegations, the court summarizes
the state court order of protection proceedings as described
by the Appellate Court of Illinois in Paul v.
Calabrese, 2014 IL App (1st) 130233-U ( Ill. App. Aug.
20, 2014) (reported at 2014 WL 4109908, reproduced at Doc.
180-1). See Ennenga v. Starns, 677 F.3d 766, 773-74
(7th Cir. 2012) (holding that public court documents are
judicially noticeable); Henson v. CSC Credit Servs.,
29 F.3d 280, 284 (7th Cir. 1994) (same, and collecting
cases). Mary Paul, Calabrese's birth mother, gave him up
for adoption in 1987. Paul, 2014 IL App (1st)
130233-U, at ¶ 6. Calabrese located Paul in September
2010 and attempted to establish a relationship with her.
Ibid. Paul initially was receptive, but she did not
want as close a relationship as Calabrese did. Id.
at ¶ 7.
2011, after Calabrese persisted in contacting her, Paul
sought an order of protection. Ibid. Her petition
alleged that Calabrese was verbally abusive, had contacted
her hundreds of times via email, text message, and phone, and
had begun to email her employees and clients, accusing her of
abandoning him at birth. Id. at ¶¶ 7-8.
The Circuit Court of Cook County entered an emergency order
of protection on July 29, 2011. Id. at ¶ 9.
Calabrese agreed to a two-year order of protection on
September 28, 2011. Id. at ¶ 10.
year later, in late 2012, Calabrese filed a series of pro
se motions to vacate the order of protection, which the
court denied. Id. at ¶¶ 11, 15; see
also Doc. 156 at ¶¶ 27-28. Calabrese appealed
in January 2013. Paul, 2014 IL App (1st) 130233-U,
at ¶ 16; see also Doc. 156 at ¶ 29. In
March and April 2013, Calabrese continued to file motions in
the trial court as it prepared the appellate record.
Paul, 2014 IL App (1st) 130233-U, at ¶¶
18-20. In August 2014, the Appellate Court of Illinois upheld
the order of protection, which had been extended beyond its
original two-year term. Id. at ¶ 32.
allegations in this suit are as follows. On May 9, 2013,
while his appeal was pending, three of our defendants-Des
Plaines police officers Victoria Poklop and Scott Moreth, and
Cook County Assistant State's Attorney Andreana
Turano-met in the Cook County Courthouse in Skokie and
conspired to arrest Calabrese and prosecute him for stalking
in retaliation for his contesting the order of protection.
Doc. 156 at ¶¶ 11-12, 32. The next day, three other
defendants-Des Plaines police officers Michael Heene, Charles
Akin, and Jennifer DePastors-joined the conspiracy.
Id. at ¶ 33. On May 13, Heene and DePastors
arrested Calabrese and placed him in jail. Id. at
Calabrese was jailed, DePastors met with Paul and yet another
defendant, Cook County Assistant State's Attorney Glen
Runk, and further conspired to charge Calabrese with stalking
for “filing numerous motions” in the protective
order case. Id. at ¶ 36. Also during that time,
Heene, DePastors, Poklop, and Akin listened in on
Calabrese's phone call with his adoptive mother and
obtained the password to his email account. Id. at
¶ 40. The officers gave the password to Paul and, on May
28, directed her to access Calabrese's email, download
private documents, and forward the documents to them.
hearing in the state criminal case was held on June 5, 2013.
Paul, 2014 IL App (1st) 130233-U, ¶ 21. The
prosecutor maintained that Calabrese had filed his motions in
order to “forc[e] Paul to appear in court as a way to
get around the order of protection.” Ibid.
According to the prosecutor, the filings “include[ed]
extra documents that had nothing to do with the issues on
appeal but that contained personal information about Paul and
her marriage, ” as well as “pictures of
Paul's dead relatives and their tombstones.”
Ibid. The prosecutor also asserted that Calabrese
had sent Paul's attorney “thousands of pages of
emails” and “two bound books of over 300 pages of
filings and motions, including phone records, e-mails,
ancestral information on Paul's family and other personal
documents” as part of a “deluge and bombardment
of information and harassment.” Ibid.
(internal quotation marks omitted).
2013, Heene gave grand jury testimony that falsely accused
Calabrese of attempting to extort money from Paul and of
filing court papers and sending materials to Paul's
attorney that were unrelated to the order of protection. Doc.
156 at ¶ 43. The grand jury indicted Calabrese on one
count each of aggravated stalking, stalking, and
cyberstalking. Id. at ¶ 44.
Calabrese was awaiting trial on the criminal charges, another
defendant, Cook County Assistant State's Attorney Melissa
Howlett, who was assigned to prosecute the criminal case,
repeatedly lied to the court in an effort to revoke
Calabrese's bond. On September 20, 2013, Howlett
maintained in court that Calabrese was emailing Paul's
clients “with threatening information, ” that he
had sent a letter to a Cook County Jail inmate with personal
information about Paul and her attorneys, and that he had
defied a court order by continuing to file pro se
motions contesting the protective order. Id. at
¶¶ 49-52. On December 4, 2013, Howlett told the
court that Calabrese was violating his bond conditions by
living at his apartment rather than at his adoptive
parents' house. Id. at ¶ 54.
2014, after a heated email exchange, Calabrese sent Howlett,
her supervisors, and her coworkers emails accusing Howlett of
lying about the conditions of his bond. Id. at
¶ 55. On June 6, 2014, Howlett arranged for a bond
revocation hearing as retaliation for Calabrese's
accusation that she had lied about his bond. Id. at
¶ 56. After the hearing, Calabrese was placed on
electronic monitoring for over two months. Ibid.
and June 2014, Calabrese filed requests for public records
under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, attempting to
uncover the basis for Howlett's accusations against him.
Id. at ¶ 57. In December, Calabrese sued the
Cook County State's Attorney Office in state court for
refusing to disclose any records. Ibid.. Howlett
then arranged for another bond revocation hearing, which
again resulted in Calabrese being placed on electronic
monitoring for over two months. Id. at ¶ 58.
point, the stalking and cyberstalking charges were dismissed
in the criminal case. Id. at ¶ 58. On August
17, 2016, the state court acquitted Calabrese of the
remaining charge, aggravated stalking, but convicted him of
an uncharged misdemeanor count of violating the order of
protection; the conviction was based on Calabrese's
contacting Paul's attorneys during the state court order
of protection proceedings. Id. at ¶ 46.