Bolden v. Pesavento et al.

Filing 103

MEMORANDUM Order: For the reasons stated in this memorandum order, codefendant City of Chicago's Motion To Bifurcate Plaintiff's Monell Claims" (Dkt. No. 95), later joined in by other defendants in Dkt. No. 99 are denied. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 8/2/2017:Mailed notice(clw, )

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

EDDIE L. BOLDEN,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 17 C 417

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Codefendant City of Chicago (the "City") has filed its Motion To Bifurcate Plaintiff's
Monell Claims" (Dkt. No. 95), later joined in by other defendants in Dkt. No. 99. 1 Although this
Court has frequently encouraged parties in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983") actions to enter
into stipulated agreements under which governmental defendants agree to accept responsibility
for judgments (other than punitive damage awards) against their employees -- often a way to
avoid legal issues that can create mutually costly diversions from the substantive merits-related
issues posed by Section 1983 claims -- Bolden's Response has presented a persuasive case for the
denial of bifurcation in this action.
There is really no need to recount the several arguments advanced by Bolden's counsel in
their 12-page Response. This Court has given full consideration to the arguments in the Motions
and to the counter contentions in the Response and finds that the latter convincingly overcome
both (1) the arguments in support of the Motions and (2) this Court's already-referred-to general

1

This memorandum order refers to those two motions collectively as the "Motions."

inclination to view such motions as serving the best interests of both parties in many Section
1983 cases.
Accordingly the Motions are denied. Because the sudden onset of a medical problem has
unfortunately required this Court's judicial tenure to be brought to an end at the end of this
month, so that this case will be assigned to one of its colleagues by a computer-driven random
assignment, the other pending motions in the case (Dkt. Nos. 57 and 61) will remain for
resolution by the assignee judge.

__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: August 2, 2017

-2-