Andrew M. Hale & Associates

Jury: Two city cops not guilty of improperly arresting and planting drugs on man

admin — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:30:03 +0000

Jurors who were the subject of background checks by the City of Chicago found two Chicago police officers not guilty Tuesday of improperly arresting and planting drugs on a man without a warrant.

The judge on the brief, two-day case brought by Chicago resident Jimmie Butler ruled Thursday the city could check potential jurors‚ arrest records on the case.

U.S. District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly said lawyers could challenge jurors based on those records during, but not after, jury selection.

In a civil trial two weeks ago represented by the same attorney, Jeffrey Granich, city lawyers ran the rap sheet of a juror based on an “instinct” he was lying about his arrest history. The juror was tossed out because he lied about eight prior arrests.

During jury selection for Butler’s case, city lawyers ran the rap sheets of all potential jurors, four of whom had rap sheets. All four, said Granich, were minorities.

“This is a way for the city to get minorities off juries,” he said.

City attorney Avi Kamionski denied that claim and said the city looked up the records of all the potential jurors, but only four had rap sheets. To have a fair trial in a case alleging mistreatment by police, he said it was necessary to have unbiased jurors.

“The goal is a fair jury,” he said. “A fair jury is what we want.”

But since Kamionski did not question one of the jurors directly about an undisclosed arrest for driving on a suspended license, Kennelly would not throw the juror out, Granich said.

Granich said Kennelly did a fair job making sure “no shenanigans went on” regarding jurors‚ raps. He said he hopes a federal ruling on running rap sheets will settle the issue.

Officers recovered a shotgun and handgun from a first floor closet and a handgun from a second floor bedroom

admin — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:33:36 +0000

Chicago police officers responded to a call of shots fired at 6702 S. Green at approximately 2:30 a.m. Officers chased a suspected gunman into the residence. Officers recovered a shotgun and handgun from a first floor closet and a handgun from a second floor bedroom. Marlin Anderson and Marilyn Anderson were charged with possession of those guns. Both plaintiffs alleged they were falsely arrested and claimed they did not live at 6702 S. Green at the time the guns were recovered. After a three day jury trial, the jury, in little over an hour, returned a verdict in favor of both police officer defendants. The four plaintiffs in the case had asked the jury to award them $250,000.

Plaintiff Christopher Monroe – one of the suspected shooters – alleged he was punched in the face several times and kicked in the face several times

admin — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:29:38 +0000

Chicago police officers responded to a call of shots fired at 6702 S. Green at approximately 2:30 a.m. Officers chased a suspected gunman into the residence. Plaintiff Christopher Monroe – one of the suspected shooters – alleged he was punched in the face several times and kicked in the face several times. Plaintiff Marlin Anderson claimed she was choked by police officers for no reason. The police officers denied the allegations and testified that upon entering the residence plaintiff Monroe punched an officer in the face and that the officer responded by punching Monroe in the face and handcuffing him. The officers also testified that Marlin Anderson was never choked and that she was arrested for obstructing their pursuit of Mr. Monroe. After a three day jury trial, the jury, in little over an hour, returned a verdict in favor of both police officer defendants. The four plaintiffs in the case had asked the jury to award them $250,000.

City of Chicago wins three court cases against police

admin — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 20:42:33 +0000

The city won three cases in federal court on Thursday, all involving allegations against the police department.

The legal victories are evidence that the city’s strategy to aggressively fight “meritless” lawsuits — rather than settle them – is working, said an attorney whose firm won two of the verdicts for the city Thursday.

In 2009, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that Supt. Jody Weis ordered that the city fight more cases against police that were considered frivolous.

“We believe taking a more aggressive approach in these cases will lead to a decrease in the number of lawsuits being filed,” Law Department spokeswoman Jennifer Hoyle said at the time.

The city dispensed a slew of cases to outside firms to argue on the city’s behalf for flat-rates.

Avi Kamionski, of Andrew M. Hale & Associates, said his firm got about 60 of them since 2009.

“We’ve had 15 of them voluntarily dismissed,” and that was on top of trial wins, Kamionski said.

On Thursday, juries sided with the police in two cases his firm handled. One involved an alleged illegal strip search, the other was an excessive force claim.

The third case the city won on Thursday involved a suspect’s claim of being denied medical treatment.

Since the strategy went into effect, the number of new lawsuits filed alleging police misconduct dropped by 47 percent last year, according to city officials.

Maureen Baker, et al. v. Jewel Food Stores and Dominick’s Finer Foods (Class Action Alleging Price Fixing Over Milk Prices In Chicago)Andrew M. Hale represented the plaintiffs in this consumer class action lawsuit brought against Chicago’s two largest grocery stores

admin — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 19:53:41 +0000

Maureen Baker, et al. v. Jewel Food Stores and Dominick’s Finer Foods (Class Action Alleging Price Fixing Over Milk Prices In Chicago)Andrew M. Hale represented the plaintiffs in this consumer class action lawsuit brought against Chicago’s two largest grocery stores, Dominick’s and Jewel, alleging they were conspiring to fix and inflate the retail prices of milk being sold in the Chicagoland area. Rock Fusco atttorneys were successful in certifying a class of consumers from the counties of Cook, Dekalb, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry and Will who purchased milk at Jewel or Dominick’s between August 1996 and August 2000. The case proceeded to a bench trial before the Honorable John E. Morrissey in the Circuit Court of Cook County. Judge Morrissey held that the plaintiffs had to prove their case under the Illinois Antitrust Act not by the typical civil burden of a preponderance of the evidence but by the more stringent clear and convincing evidence standard. Unfortunately, at trial, Judge Morrissey ruled in favor of the defendant grocery stores. On January 12, 2005, the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

Alsdorf v. Bennigson, Case No. 04 C 5953 (Picasso painting stolen by Nazis)Andrew M. Hale was retained as local counsel on behalf of the defendant Thomas Bennigson

admin — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 19:52:07 +0000

Alsdorf v. Bennigson, Case No. 04 C 5953 (Picasso painting stolen by Nazis)Andrew M. Hale was retained as local counsel on behalf of the defendant Thomas Bennigson, a California resident who claimed that he was the rightful owner of Picasso’s painting “Femme en blanc” (“Woman in White”). Chicago resident Marilyn Alsdorf purchased the painting from a New York gallery in 1975 for $357,000. Bennigson claimed the Nazis stole the painting from his grandmother during World War II. Bennigson’s grandmother, Carlotta Landsberg, bought the painting in Berlin in the mid-1920′s. When Landsberg fled to the United States, she entrusted the painting to collector Justin K. Thannhauser, who himself soon had to flee. The painting was subsequently looted from Thannhauser’s warehouse. Bennigson filed suit in California seeking recovery of the painting. Alsdorf filed her own suit in Chicago, claiming she was the rightful owner of the painting. In 2005, Alsdorf agreed to pay Bennigson $6.5 million to Bennigson to settle the parties’ litigation. Bennigson’s California counsel was E. Randol Schoenberg.

Plaintiff alleged that he was falsely arrested, maliciously prosecuted on robbery charges based on perjured police testimony

admin — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 20:21:00 +0000

Jackson v. Visvardis, et al. – Plaintiff alleged that he was falsely arrested, maliciously prosecuted on robbery charges based on perjured police testimony. The defendants prevailed on a motion to dismiss based on plaintiff’s guilty plea, even though it was to a lesser charge.

Brian Moser alleged that he was falsely arrested, beaten, and discriminated against by Chicago police officers during a domestic dispute

admin — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 20:19:37 +0000

Moser v. Gounaris, et al. – Brian Moser alleged that he was falsely arrested, beaten, and discriminated against by Chicago police officers during a domestic dispute. After extensive litigation, defense attorneys secured a dismissal based on Mr. Moser’s repeated violations of discovery rules.

Jorge Rosas alleged that two officers curbed his car, pulled him out, and beat him with asps for no reason

admin — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 20:12:17 +0000

Rosas v. Oppedisano, 09 C 3605 – Jorge Rosas alleged that two officers curbed his car, pulled him out, and beat him with asps for no reason. The officers quickly prevailed on a motion to dismiss based on Rosas’s guilty plea for resisting arrest.

Plaintiff, Russell Evans, brought suit against several individual officers and the City of Chicago for alleged violations of his civil rights

admin — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 20:07:07 +0000

Evans v. Tavares, et al., 09 C 2817 – Plaintiff, Russell Evans, brought suit against several individual officers and the City of Chicago for alleged violations of his civil rights. Evans alleged that the three officers arrested him without incident, but charged him with possession of cocaine that wasn’t his. The officers responded that they watched Evans drop the drugs right in front of them, then arrested him and charged him with the drugs. Defendants won the case on a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute the case. The plaintiff would not appear for his own deposition, and Defendants moved to dismiss. Judge Leinenweber granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss based on plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the case.