Case: 1:13-cv-01937 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/13/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
Rita King,

Plaintiff,
-vsCommander Glenn Evans and
the City of Chicago,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 13-cv(Jury Demand)

Complaint
Plaintiff files this Complaint and, by counsel, alleges as follows:
1.

This is a civil action arising under the Fourth and Fourteenth

Amendments to the United States Constitution and under Title 42 U.S.C.
§ § 1983 and 1988. The jurisdiction of this Court is conferred under 28
U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343.
2.

Plaintiff Rita King is a resident and citizen of the state of Illinois.

3.

At all times relevant to the matters set forth in this Complaint,

defendant Glenn Evans was employed as a supervisor with the
Chicago Police Department.

Defendant acted within the scope of

employment and under color of law.
4.

Defendant City of Chicago is a municipal corporation organized

and existing under the laws of the state of Illinois.
1

 Case: 1:13-cv-01937 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/13/13 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2

5.

On April 10, 2011, Chicago police officers were called to plaintiff’s

residence due to a domestic disturbance. An unknown female police
officer approached plaintiff with a taser drawn; ordered her to
extinguish her cigarette; handcuffed; and transported plaintiff to the 6th
District with an unknown male officer.
6.

At the police station, plaintiff was escorted to a processing room

where she was handcuffed to a table and questioned.
7.

Sometime later, an unknown police officer attempted to fingerprint

plaintiff.

Plaintiff refused to be fingerprinted and asked the police

officer why she was under arrest. The police officer responded saying
“we know somebody who can get your fingerprints.”
8.

Defendant Evans then entered the processing room and ordered a

number of officers to restrain plaintiff. Defendant Evans proceeded to
violently press his fist into plaintiff’s nose for approximately 3 to 5 minutes
saying, numerous times, that he was going to “push [her] nose through
[her] brain.”

Plaintiff experienced excruciating pain; profusely bled;

and feared for her life.
9.

Plaintiff was then fingerprinted; placed in an interrogation room for

15 to 20 minutes; and was released by the unknown female police
officer.
10.

Plaintiff left the police station; walked approximately one block;

and lost consciousness for approximately 15 to 30 minutes.
2

Plaintiff

 Case: 1:13-cv-01937 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/13/13 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3

eventually regained consciousness and called a friend to transport her
to a hospital for medical care.
11.

On April 11, plaintiff complained to the Office of Professional

Standards (OPS) regarding defendant Evans’ misconduct.

Plaintiff

made a statement; had her facial injuries photographed by an
investigator; and requested defendant to be reprimanded.

Plaintiff

was never informed of the findings of the OPS investigation.

On

information and belief, defendant Evans was not disciplined.
12.

On April 12, plaintiff was treated at Roseland Hospital for a facial

fracture.
13.

The City is aware of defendant Evans’ long history of citizen

complaints regarding excessive force; has been investigated numerous
times by OPS; but nonetheless enjoys a decorated career as a police
officer.
14.

Defendant Evans has been named a defendant in at least five

other lawsuits pursuant to his role as a Chicago police office, including,
but not limited to: Simmons v. City of Chicago, 08 C 2769 (excessive
force to a city of Chicago Water Department employee attempting to
provide Evans with notice of overdue water bill) and Simmons v. Officer
E.O. Nwagwu et. al. 08 C 3146 (defendant Evans allegedly punched
and proceeded to Taser plaintiff’s groin area in a police interrogation
room).
3

 Case: 1:13-cv-01937 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/13/13 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4

15.

In August 2012, defendant Evans was promoted by Superintendent

McCarthy to Commander of the 3rd District. At the time Superintendent
McCarthy appointed defendant to this position, he knew of should
have known of the numerous citizen complaints of excessive force
against defendant Evans.
16.

The city of Chicago has a widespread practice of failing to

discipline and/or punish police officers for the use of excessive force.
This de facto policy encourages Chicago police officers to engage in
misconduct with impunity and without fear of official consequences.
17.

Moreover, the City has a well-settled, widespread “code of silence”

that exists within the Chicago Police Department whereby officers
conceal each other’s misconduct in contravention of their sworn
duties.

This de facto policy and code of silence is evidenced and

caused by the Chicago Police Department’s failure to; (1) sufficiently
investigate allegations of police misconduct; (2) accept citizen
complaints against police officers; (3) promptly interview suspected
officers or take witness statements and preserve evidence; and (4)
properly and sufficiently discipline officers.

This de facto policy

encourages Chicago police officers to engage in misconduct with
impunity and without fear of official consequences.
18.

Defendant Evans’ use of force was excessive and unreasonable.

The above described wrongdoing was objectively unreasonable and
4

 Case: 1:13-cv-01937 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/13/13 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5

was undertaken intentionally with willful indifference to plaintiff’s
constitutional rights.
19.

After being beaten by defendant Evans, plaintiff repeatedly

requested medical attention. Despite having actual knowledge of her
serious medical condition, defendant Evans failed to provide plaintiff
with medical attention.

In this manner, the conduct of defendant

Evans was objectively unreasonable and deliberately indifferent to
plaintiff’s objectively serious medical needs.
20.

Defendants above described wrongdoing caused plaintiff to incur

physical injuries and subjects her to emotional distress and anguish.
21.

As a result of the foregoing, plaintiff has been deprived of her rights

secured by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution
of the United States.
22.

Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that she receive appropriate
compensatory damages as well as punitive damages against the
individual defendant. Plaintiff also requests that the costs of this action,
including attorneys’ fees, be taxed against defendants.

5

 Case: 1:13-cv-01937 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/13/13 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6

Respectfully submitted,
/s/

Patrick W. Morrissey
Patrick W. Morrissey
ARDC 6309730
Thomas G. Morrissey
Thomas G. Morrissey, Ltd.
10249 S. Western Ave.
Chicago, Il. 60643
(773)233-7900

Attorneys for plaintiff

6