Opinion
No. 00 C 6264
April 4, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff has alleged that she was arrested without probable cause on February 5, 1999. She alleged two state claims as well. The defendants move to dismiss. That motion is granted in part and denied in part.
The main thrust of the motion is that plaintiff has alleged an insufficient boilerplate Monell claim against the City, and it is boilerplate to a considerable extent — plaintiff claims both policy and custom, although it is apparent she means custom, not an express policy; she refers to racial profiling of African-American motorists and citizens, a claim clearly irrelevant here; her references to "other policies and/or customs of the City of Chicago and/or the Chicago Police Department . . ." is plainly insufficient: the City is not required to speculate about unspecified "other policies and/or customs."
Having said that, we are also mindful that the pleading threshold is low, as explained in McCormick v. City of Chicago, 230 F.3d 319 (7th Cir. 2000), and we think the Monell claim meets that low threshold standard. We therefore deny that aspect of the defendants' motion, even though we may not understand why the plaintiff wishes massively to expand what on its face appears to be a simple false arrest case. Further, while we see no substantive due process claim — plaintiff complains about being arrested and held, not about brutal treatment while detained — she does allege an equal protection claim. She contends that she was singled out because she is Hispanic.
The motion is granted to the extent it moves to dismiss the punitive damages claim against the City and to dismiss Counts II and III as to all defendants.