Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS,
EASTERN DIVISION

MATTHEW MALLETT, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
) Case No.
)
CITY OF CHICAGO, and UNKNOWN )
POLICE OFFICERS, )
)
Defendants. ) JURY DEMANDED

CIVIL COMPLAINT

NOW COMES the plaintiff, MATTHEW MALLETT, by and through his

attorneys, Walters O'Brien Law Offices, and complaining of the Defendants, CITY OF

CHICAGO and UNKNOWN CHICAGO POLICE OFFICERS, states as follows:

Introduction

1. This is a civil action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to redress wrongs

perpetrated by the Chicago Police Officer Defendants under color of law that

deprived Plaintiff of rights secured by the Constitution and laws of the United

States.

Jurisdiction and Venue

2. The events purported herein all occurred in the Northern District of Illinois, and

upon information and belief, all parties to the case reside within the Northern

District of Illinois.

Parties

1
Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:2

3. The Plaintiff, Matthew Mallett, is a United States citizen who lives in Cook

County, Illinois.

4. Defendant Chicago Police Officers were, at the time of this occurrence, duly

licensed City of Chicago Police Officers. They engaged in the conduct

complained of in the course and scope of their employment and under color of

law. They are sued in their individual capacities.

5. Defendant City of Chicago, (“City”) is a municipal corporation duly incorporated

under the laws of the State of Illinois, and is the employer and principal of the

individual police officer defendants.

Factual Background

6. On June 21, 2015 Plaintiff was attending a Gay Pride Parade related event in the

Boystown neighborhood of Lakeview in Chicago with a group of friends.

7. While attending the event, Plaintiff was dressed in a speedo swimsuit and carried

a backpack for his belongings.

8. At some point, Plaintiff was separated from his friends.

9. After being unable to find or call his friends, Plaintiff went back to his car to wait

for them.

10. One of the doors on Plaintiff’s car was unlocked, so he was able to enter it despite

not having his keys.

11. Plaintiff got into his car, crawled into the back, behind the backseat, and lay down

to wait for his friends.

12. At some point, Plaintiff fell asleep.

2
Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:3

13. The Defendant Officers' pounding on the window of his car awakened plaintiff.

14. Plaintiff opened the door to several officers, police vehicles and an ambulance.

Plaintiff told the officers that this was his car and he did not have any keys on

him, so he had no intention of driving.

15. Several times Plaintiff attempted to explain to the Officers that this was his car

and he was just waiting for his friends.

16. Defendant Officers demanded Plaintiff get out of the car. When Plaintiff asked

what he had done wrong, without any provocation, one of the Defendant Officers

sprayed pepper spray into the car.

17. The pepper spray temporarily incapacitated Plaintiff, blinded him, and caused him

a violent coughing fit and severe burning and pain in his throat and nostrils.

18. After temporarily incapacitating Plaintiff, the individual officers dragged Plaintiff

out of his own car and strapped him to a gurney. The officers handcuffed Plaintiff

with his arms behind his back and under the gurney.

19. The officers then unnecessarily placed a mask on Plaintiff’s face, preventing him

from spitting out the pepper spray in his mouth.

20. Plaintiff was then given a shot of an unknown substance.

21. Plaintiff awoke the following morning in a hospital bed.

22. Plaintiff suffered various physical injuries, including bruising, pain and ongoing

numbness in his hands due to the handcuffs, for which he has had to seek medical

assistance.

23. Plaintiff was targeted by the Defendant Officers because he is a gay man and was

3
 Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:4

attending an event celebrating LGBT rights.

24. Plaintiff has suffered emotional and psychological injuries and trauma associated

with the wrongful actions of the officers.

25. In addition, Plaintiff has received bills from the hospital exceeding $5,000.

Count I
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Violations — Excessive Force

26. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the allegations in the preceding

paragraphs.

27. The actions of the Defendant Officers constituted unreasonable, unjustifiable, and

excessive force against Plaintiff, thus violating his rights under the Fourth

Amendment to the United States Constitution, and 42 U.S.C., Section 1983.

28. As a proximate result of the above-detailed actions of Defendant officers, Plaintiff

was injured, including severe pain, physical injury, mental suffering, anguish and

humiliation, panic and anxiety attacks, and fear.

WHEREFORE, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff demands judgment for

compensatory damages against the Defendant Officers and Defendant City of Chicago,

and because the Defendant acted maliciously, wantonly, or oppressively, punitive

damages, plus the costs of this action and attorney’s fees, and such other and additional

relief as this court deems equitable and just.

Count II
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Violations – Civil Conspiracy

29. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the allegations in the preceding

paragraphs.

4
 Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:5

30. As described more fully above, the Defendants reached an agreement amongst

themselves to deprive Plaintiff of his Constitutional rights, all as described more

fully throughout this Complaint.

31. Each of the Defendants further conspired to wrongfully incapacitate and restrain

Plaintiff.

32. In this manner, the Defendant Officers, acting in concert with each other, have

conspired by concerted action to accomplish an unlawful purpose by an unlawful

means.

33. In furtherance of the conspiracy, each of the co-conspirators committed overt acts

and was an otherwise willful participant in joint activity.

34. As a direct and proximate result of the illicit prior agreement referenced above,

Plaintiff's rights were violated, and he suffered physical pain and suffering, severe

emotional distress, and anguish, as is more fully alleged above.

35. The misconduct described in this Count was undertaken with malice, willfulness,

and reckless indifference to the rights of plaintiff.

WHEREFORE, as a result of Defendant Officers' unconstitutional actions, Plaintiff

requests punitive and compensatory damages in an amount deemed at time of trial to be

just, fair, and appropriate.

Count III
State Claim – Battery

36. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the allegations in the preceding

paragraphs.

37. Defendant officers used an unreasonable and excessive amount of force against

5
 Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:6

Plaintiff causing significant injuries to the Plaintiff.

38. More specifically, Defendant Police Officers unnecessarily sprayed pepper spray

into the vehicle while Plaintiff was still in it and posing no threat to the Officers,

causing the Plaintiff to be temporarily incapacitated by blindness, violent

coughing and painful burning on his skin, in his throat and in his nostrils.

39. As a direct and proximate result of the malicious actions of the Defendant, the

Plaintiff was injured, including sustaining significant injuries, medical bills, loss

of freedom, humiliation, embarrassment, the deprivation of her constitutional

rights and dignity, anxiety, and extreme emotional distress.

40. The City is sued in this Count pursuant to the doctrine of respondent superior, in

that the Defendant Officers performed the actions complained of while in the

employ of Defendant City, and while acting within the scope of this employment.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants, Defendant Officers

and the City of Chicago, plus the costs of this action and attorneys' fees, and such other

and additional relief as this court deems equitable and just.

Count IV
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Violations – False Arrest

41. Plaintiff re-alleges and reincorporates all previous paragraphs.

42. As described above, the Defendants conspired among themselves and wrongfully

placed Plaintiff in custody without justification.

43. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Officers’ continued unlawful

detention, Plaintiff suffered significant emotional injuries including mental and

emotional damage and trauma, humiliation, damage to his personal and

6
 Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:7

professional reputation, loss of liberty, mental distress and anguish as alleged in

this Complaint.

WHEREFORE, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, Plaintiff demands judgment against

the individual defendants jointly and severally for compensatory damages against

Defendants and because these Defendants acted maliciously, wantonly, or oppressively,

punitive damages, plus the costs of this action and attorney’s fees, and such other and

additional relief as this court deems equitable and just.

Count V
State Claim - False Imprisonment

44. Plaintiff re-alleges and reincorporates all previous paragraphs.

45. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants, without probable cause, knowingly,

wrongfully, and unlawfully detained and restrained the Plaintiff against his will

through their asserted legal authority.

46. At no time during the detainment did Plaintiff resist or attempt to resist the

Defendant officers, but was fully cooperating with the orders of the Defendants

and was fully conscious of his confinement.

47. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant officers’ false imprisonment,

Plaintiff suffered emotional injuries including mental and emotional damage and

trauma, humiliation, damage to his personal and professional reputation, loss of

liberty, mental distress, and anguish as alleged in this Complaint.

48. The City of Chicago is sued in this Count pursuant to the doctrine of respondeat

superior, in that the Defendant Officers performed the actions complained of

while on duty and in the employ of Defendant City and while acting within the

7
 Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:8

scope of this employment.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the individual defendants

jointly and severally for compensatory damages against Defendant Officers and

because these Defendants acted maliciously, wantonly, or oppressively, punitive

damages, plus the costs of this action and attorney’s fees, and such other and

additional relief as this court deems equitable and just.

Count VI
745 ILCS 10/9-102 – Indemnity

1. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the allegations in the preceding

paragraphs.

2. Defendant City of Chicago is or was the employer of the Defendant Officers.

3. Defendants committed the acts alleged above under color of law and in the scope

of their employment as employees of the City of Chicago.

WHEREFORE, should the Defendant Officers be found liable on the claims

set forth above, Plaintiff demands that, pursuant to 745 ILCS 10/9-102, the Defendant

City of Chicago be found liable for any judgment Plaintiff obtains against said

Defendants, as well as attorneys' fees and costs awarded.

Count VII
State Claim – Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

4. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the allegations in the preceding

paragraphs.

5. The above-detailed conduct by the Defendants were extreme and outrageous,

exceeding all bounds of human decency.

8
 Case: 1:16-cv-04568 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:9

6. Defendants performed the acts detailed above with the intent of inflicting severe

emotional distress on the Plaintiff or with knowledge of the high probability that

the conduct would cause such distress.

7. As a direct and proximate result of this conduct, Plaintiff did in fact suffer severe

emotional distress, resulting in injury to her mind, body, and nervous system.

8. The City is sued in this Count pursuant to the doctrine of respondent superior, in

that the Defendant Officers performed the actions complained of while in the

employ of Defendant City, and while acting within the scope of this employment.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the individual Defendants and

Defendant City, jointly and severally, for compensatory damages and because these

Defendants acted maliciously, wantonly, or oppressively, punitive damages, plus the

costs of this action and attorney’s fees, and such other and additional relief as this court

deems equitable and just.

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS JURY TRIAL

Respectfully Submitted,

_s/ Kellie Walters___________

Kellie Walters
Walters O'Brien Law Offices
800 W. Huron Street, Suite 4E
Chicago, IL 60642
312-428-5890