Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

17-1143 - Adams v. City Of Chicago et al

Download Files


Document in Context
17-1143 - Adams v. City Of Chicago et al
April 5, 2018
PDF | More
ted, must appear in person or through counsel at all court dates, including motion notice dates or status hearings. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 4/5/2018. Notices mailed by judge's staff (ntf, )ORDER. Status hearing held and continued to 4/25/18 at 9:30 a.m. Motion hearing held. Plaintiff failed to appear again and must appear at the next status hearing. Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's false arrest claim 73 is denied as moot. Although the Court permitted Plaintiff to proceed on a false arrest claim in his original complaint, Plaintiff later clarified that he had "never made a claim of false arrest because [he] had a plea bargain." 45 Plaintiff then submitted an amended complaint 68. Given Plaintiff's earlier protestation that he did not intend to pursue a false arrest claim due to his plea bargain on related charges, the Court screened the amended complaint and permitted him to proceed only on two claims: (1) that the officers used unreasonable force in arresting him; and (2) that the officers unreasonably refused to procure medical care for him 70. Because Plaintiff was not allowed to proceed on a false arrest claim, Defendants' motion to dismiss that purported claim is denied as moot. The Court finally notes that Plaintiff was ordered to submit a public version of his amended complaint that does not include personal identifying information by 3/21/18 70. Plaintiff has not submitted the amendment as ordered. On its own motion, the Court extends that deadline to 4/13/18. If Plaintiff fails to submit the amended complaint by that date, this case may be dismissed for want of prosecution. Plaintiff, who is not incarcera