Bolden v. City Of Chicago 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, )

Download PDF
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. ยง 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-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?