Weekly Case Digests January 11, 2021 January 15, 2021.

Byline: Derek Hawkins

7th Circuit Digests

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Chandra Turner v. City of Champaign, et al.,

Case No.: 19-3446

Officials: KANNE and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Focus: 4th Amendment Violation Excessive Force

Richard Turner died during an encounter with police officers in Champaign, Illinois. The officers were trying to detain him to protect himself and others and to take him to a hospital for evaluation of his mental health. With hindsight we can say that his death might have been avoided. In this suit by Mr. Turner's estate, however, the central question is not whether officers used best police practices but whether they violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment by using excessive force against him. The district court found that undisputed facts, including a coroner's findings that Mr. Turner suffered no physical trauma but died of a cardiac arrhythmia, showed that the officers did not use excessive force. We agree and affirm summary judgment for the defendants.

Affirmed

Full Text

[divider]

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Brad Sandefur v. Thomas J. Dart, et al.,

Case No.: 19-2787

Officials: SYKES, Chief Judge, and HAMILTON and ST. EVE, Circuit Judges.

Focus: ADA and Due Process Claim Violation

Plaintiff Brad Sandefur is a corrections officer for the Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois. He suffers from disk desiccation in his spine and osteoarthritis in his knees. Both conditions can cause him intermittent pain for weeks at a time. In 2011, Sandefur applied for and received a handicapped parking placard from the Illinois Secretary of State. His application identified his qualifying disability as osteoarthritis or a "knee condition." The application asserted that he could not walk without using an assistive device such as a cane or walker or receiving help from another person, and that the impairment was permanent.

In 2015, however, at age 55, Sandefur applied for and was accepted to the Cook County Sheriff's Police Academy, which offered a path for him to move from corrections officer to a job as a police officer with the Sheriff. On the first day of training, an instructor noticed the handicapped parking placard hanging from the rearview mirror of Sandefur's car. When the instructor asked about the placard, Sandefur said it was there for his wife. When a second officer asked about the placard, Sandefur said that it was his wife's but that he also used it. Wanting to confirm that Sandefur was medically cleared to participate in the Academy's physical training, Academy officials met with Sandefur. He explained that his doctor had approved the placard because of his osteoarthritis but that he was not requesting any accommodations in the Academy course.

In the face of Sandefur's inconsistent explanations, the Sheriff's Office eventually opened a formal investigation into his acquisition and use of the placard. Sandefur's explanations did not improve or become more consistent. For example, Sandefur said that he believed his initial placard application had been authorized for the wrong condition and admitted that he had used his placard for years based on convenience rather than medical necessity.

Toward the end of the investigation, the lead investigator concluded that Sandefur had demonstrated an "inability to provide truthful responses to basic questions." Emphasizing that the Sheriff's police officers are held to "the highest standards" and required to "lead by example," the officer recommended that Sandefur be dismissed from the Academy. Based on these findings, the Sheriff's Office dismissed Sandefur from the Academy and returned him to his job as a corrections officer.

Sandefur has sued Sheriff Thomas J. Dart and Cook County (together, the "Sheriff's Office") for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. 12112, and his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment for the Sheriff's Office, concluding that it had dismissed Sandefur based on its honest belief that he had lied about his disability, not because he had a disability, and that Sandefur had offered no evidence of a due process violation. Sandefur v. Cook County, No. 17 cv 2048, 2019 WL 3825509 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 15, 2019). We affirm. We address first the ADA claim and then the due process claim.

Affirmed

Full Text

[divider]

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Keli Calderone v. City of Chicago, et al.,

Case No.: 19-2858

Officials: FLAUM, ROVNER, and WOOD, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Qualified Immunity

Caught in a fit of road rage, Keli Calderone shot another driver with her handgun. An Illinois grand jury subsequently indicted her for attempted murder. Calderone's employerthe City of Chicago ("the City")administratively charged her for violating its personnel rules. At her later criminal bench trial, Calderone argued self-defense; an Illinois judge agreed and acquitted her. Soon thereafter, the City reinstated Calderone.

Calderone then sued the City and her supervisors in federal court, claiming, among other things, that the City fired her in retaliation for her exercise of her Second Amendment rights. The City moved to dismiss the claims, arguing that Calderone's conduct was not within the scope of activity protected by the Second Amendment. The district court granted the motion, reasoning that even if Calderone does have a constitutional right to discharge her firearm in self-defense, qualified immunity shielded her supervisors from suit because caselaw has not clearly established that right. We affirm the district court on the sole ground that Calderone's supervisors are entitled to qualified immunity.

Affirmed

Full Text

[divider]

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Jeremy Hogenkamp

Case No.: 20-1376

Officials: EASTERBROOK, KANNE, and WOOD, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sentencing Guidelines Supervised Release

Jeremy Hogenkamp pleaded guilty to a federal crime and was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment...