Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

)
SHARNIA PHILLIPS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. ) No.
)
CITY OF CHICAGO, a Municipal Corporation, )
ANTHONY CUTRONE, in his )
individual and official capacities, and other ) Jury Trial Demanded
UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or )
CO-CONSPIRATORS, )
)
Defendants. )

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, SHARNIA PHILLIPS, by her attorneys, Peter A. Cantwell, Esq. and Eliot D.

Hellman, Esq., for her complaint against the Defendants, CITY OF CHICAGO, a Municipal

Corporation, ANTHONY CUTRONE, and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-

CONSPIRATORS, states as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. The plaintiff, Sharnia Phillips, brings this civil rights action for compensatory and

punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988, and the Fourth and Fourteenth

Amendments to the United States Constitution, against Anthony Cutrone and other unknown co-

defendants and co-conspirators for the use of excessive force against Sharnia Phillips and for the

false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution of Sharnia Phillips.

2. In the late night hours of January 16, 2017, Phillips was peacefully laying in bed

waiting to fall asleep, in the rear, second-floor bedroom, in her home when City of Chicago

police officers suddenly burst through her door wearing tactical gear and body armor, and

carrying assault weapons in a supposed search for weapons and other individuals.
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:1

3. Phillips was arrested, forcibly removed from her home, and forced to stand

outside in the Chicago winter under armed guard while police officers ransacked her home

looking for criminals and contraband pursuant to a fraudulently obtained search warrant that the

officers either knew were not there, or unreasonably, or in reckless disregard of the truth,

believed were at that location.

4. The police officers’ actions in kicking down Sharnia Phillips’ door, forcing her

outside at gunpoint, and then searching her home for contraband constitutes an unreasonable and

excessive use of force, in violation of Phillips’ rights under the Constitution of the United States.

The police actions that night also constitute false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious

prosecution in violation of Phillips’ rights under the Constitution of the United States.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, and § 42 U.S.C. 1983, this court has

original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s causes of action for excessive force, false arrest, false

imprisonment, and malicious prosecution arising under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments

to the Constitution of the United States. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, venue properly lies in the

Northern District of Illinois because all of the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in

Cook County, Illinois.

6. Pursuant to § 42 U.S.C. 1367, this Court also has the power to hear and adjudicate

the plaintiff’s concurrent claims arising under state law.

PARTIES

7. Plaintiff, Sharnia Phillips, is a resident of Chicago, Illinois.

8. On January 16, 2017, and continuing through the present, Defendant CITY OF

CHICAGO was a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of

Illinois.
2
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:1

9. On January 16, 2017, and, upon information and belief, continuing through the

present, defendant ANTHONY CUTRONE, and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-

CONSPIRATORS, (the “Police Officers”), were officers, and agents and/or employees of the

CITY OF CHICAGO, and were involved in the arrest of Plaintiff.

10. At all times relevant hereto, the Police Officers were acting while on duty and/or

in the scope of their employment with the City of Chicago.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

11. On January 16, 2017, at approximately 11:45 p.m., Plaintiff was peacefully laying

in bed waiting to fall asleep, in the rear, second-floor bedroom, of the home she owned located at

., Chicago, Illinois. Phillips lives alone.

12. The building was Phillip’s second home, which she generally rented to tenants in

order to generate income. However, in January of 2017, and for several months prior, Plaintiff

had used the house as her primary residence in order to conduct renovations at the property.

13. Just before midnight, the Plaintiff was awakened by a loud bang and the

reverberations of her house shaking. She immediately roused herself from bed and went to the

front window to see why the house was shaking.

14. When she looked out the window, Phillips was greeted by a scene pulled straight

from a Hollywood action movie in the street in front of her house. Police cars were parked with

their headlights on and flashing blue and red lights. She could also see a truck with a battering

ram and could hear a person shouting over a loudspeaker, “ we have a warrant for your

arrest!” She noted that the person on the loudspeaker did not use any names, but only referred to

the buildings address. The person on the loudspeaker did not make any demand that the

occupants surrender, or give a sufficient opportunity to do so.

3
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:1

15. Upon seeing the police in her street and hearing the announcement, Phillips –

herself, a former law enforcement officer employed as a parole agent with the State of Illinois –

immediately rushed to the staircase and sprinted to the first floor in order to admit the police.

16. However, a fraction of a second before Phillips reached the front entrance to her

home the door suddenly burst inwards. A stun grenade (also known as a “flash bang” grenade)

was thrown onto the floor of the foyer near Phillips’ feet, blinding and disorienting her.

17. Phillips immediately threw her hands up in surrender as a flood of police officers

wearing tactical gear, helmets, body armor, and carrying automatic weapons charged through the

doorway and into her home, simultaneously shouting at Phillips to “Get down!” and demanding

to know “Who else is in the house?”

18. Heavily armed and armored officers then forced Phillips from her home and into

the street on a cold and wet January night, wearing nothing but her pajamas, and without shoes

or a coat.

19. Phillips – still without shoes or coat – stood outside in the street, under the guard

of a heavily armed officer, for approximately 45 minutes while police ransacked her home.

Boxes, cabinets, and chests were thrown open and the contents removed, personal items were

strewn about, ceiling tiles were displaced, and vents to the heating ductwork were detached from

the walls throughout the house. The entire time, Phillips’ only concern was that officers not

execute her four-year old dog, named Willow, who is a pitbull-mastiff mix.

20. The police search found absolutely nothing of an illegal or contraband nature.

21. After completion of the search, Phillips was permitted back into her home.

22. For the first time, Phillips was shown a search warrant for the premises, as well as

for two individuals named Robert Gunn (“Robert”) and Jasmine Gunn (“Jasmine”)(collectively,

“the Gunns”). The warrants provide for seizure of illegal firearms, including assault rifles, and
4
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:1

records of illegal firearm sales. Notably, the warrants do not provide for the arrest of either

Robert or Jasmine.

23. Plaintiff was asked about her former tenant, Norma Moore, who was apparently

the grandmother of Robert and Jasmine.

24. Moore had not lived at in at least 6 months.

25. Robert Gunn and Jasmin Gunn have never lived at .

26. Police claimed that they had a “reliable informant,” and said to Phillips, “You’re

law enforcement, so you know how this goes.”

27. After several hours, police eventually departed, leaving Phillip’s home in total

disarray, and with a front door that would neither close nor lock. Phillips was neither charged

nor prosecuted with any crimes.

28. The following day Phillips went to the police station for additional details as to

why her home had been targeted. She learned that her home had been under surveillance the

entire previous day. However, the only person to have either entered or exited the house during

the entire day was Phillips herself when she was gone for a period of time to go to the gym.

29. Phillips also subsequently confirmed that there had been an inordinate and

noticeable police presence on January 16, 2017 in the streets around her house.

30. At no time did Plaintiff commit any crime for which either a search of her home

or an arrest was lawfully authorized.

31. Prior to their raid on January 16, 2017, the police knew, or should have known,

that Sharnia Phillips was the rightful, titled owner of the house at . They

knew or should have known that she was a former law enforcement officer, had no criminal

history, and no outstanding warrants. They knew or should have known that Sharnia Phillips

was unrelated to Robert or Jasmine, the two individuals listed on the search warrants.
5
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:1

32. The police knew or should have known that Phillips was the only person to have

entered or exited the house on January 16, 2017, and the police knew or should have known that

Phillips did not match the description of either Robert (a man) or Jasmine, who was 20 years

younger and 25 lbs thinner than Phillips.

33. The only connection between Robert Gunn, Jasmine Gunn, and the house at

of which the police were aware was that the Gunns’ grandmother, Norma Moore,

was previously a tenant at that address. However, given that the police knew the only connection

to the Gunns was through Moore, the police also knew, or should have known, that Moore had

not lived at 1408 W. 71st Street for approximately six months.

34. Nevertheless, Officer Cutrone, either knowingly, or with a reckless disregard for

the truth, fraudulently obtained a search warrant for the premises at .

Because the warrant was premised on information that was either knowingly presented as false,

or presented as true in reckless disregard for the truth, the warrant itself was void.

35. Plaintiff had engaged in no criminal or otherwise suspicious acts, and the entry,

restraint and search of Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s home was in violation of the Fourth and

Fourteenth Amendment guarantee against searches and seizures, without probable cause, and of

her right to due process.

36. In addition to the violation of her civil rights on January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff

developed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and as a result, was forced to undergo extensive

psychiatric and mental health treatment that continues to the present day. The plaintiff has been

unable to attend to the normal affairs of daily life, including work and schooling.

COUNT I - FALSE ARREST

37. Plaintiff restates and realleges Paragraphs 7 through 36 as though fully set forth

herein.
6
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:1

38. As a result of the actions of Officer Cutrone and other Unknown Officers, acting

both individually and as co-conspirators, the Plaintiff was deprived of her rights, privileges and

immunities under the United States Constitution, including but limited to, the Fourth and

Fourteenth Amendments, and of the laws of the State of Illinois.

39. As a further direct and proximate result of the Police Officers’ actions, Plaintiff

suffered damages including pain and suffering, mental trauma, loss of liberty, extensive damage

to property, damage to reputation, legal expenses, and further and other injuries and damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SHARNIA PHILLIPS demands judgment against Defendant

ANTHONY CUTRONE and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-CONSPIRATORS

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in an amount to be determined at trial, punitive damages, attorneys

fees, costs, and other such relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

COUNT II - FALSE IMPRISONMENT

40. Plaintiff restates and realleges Paragraphs 7 through 36 as though fully set forth

herein.

41. As a result of the actions of Officer Cutrone and other Unknown Officers, acting

both individually and as co-conspirators, the Plaintiff was deprived of her rights, privileges and

immunities under the United States Constitution, including but limited to, the Fourth and

Fourteenth Amendments, and of the laws of the State of Illinois.

42. As a further direct and proximate result of the Police Officers’ actions, Plaintiff

suffered damages including pain and suffering, mental trauma, loss of liberty, extensive damage

to property, damage to reputation, legal expenses, and further and other injuries and damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SHARNIA PHILLIPS demands judgment against Defendant

ANTHONY CUTRONE and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-CONSPIRATORS

7
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:1

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in an amount to be determined at trial, punitive damages, attorneys

fees, costs, and other such relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

COUNT III - MALICIOUS PROSECUTION

43. Plaintiff restates and realleges Paragraphs 7 through 36 as though fully set forth

herein.

44. As a result of the actions of Officer Cutrone and other Unknown Officers, acting

both individually and as co-conspirators, the Plaintiff was deprived her of rights, privileges and

immunities under the United States Constitution, including but limited to, the Fourth and

Fourteenth Amendments, and of the laws of the State of Illinois.

45. As a further direct and proximate result of the Police Officers’ actions, Plaintiff

suffered damages including pain and suffering, mental trauma, loss of liberty, extensive damage

to property, damage to reputation, legal expenses, and further and other injuries and damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SHARNIA PHILLIPS demands judgment against Defendant

ANTHONY CUTRONE and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-CONSPIRATORS

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in an amount to be determined at trial, punitive damages, attorneys

fees, costs, and other such relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

COUNT IV – EXCESSIVE FORCE

46. Plaintiff restates and realleges Paragraphs 7 through 36 as though fully set forth

herein.

47. At the time of the raid on Phillips’ home, the police knew or should have known

that neither Robert nor Jasmine were present in the house.

48. During the raid, in which the police notably possessed only a search warrant –

rather than an arrest warrant – for the premises, Robert, or Jasmine, they made no attempt to

knock on the door of Phillips home and serve the search warrant without violence.
8
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:1

49. Instead, the police initiated the encounter by ramming Phillips’ door with a

mobile battering ram and threatened the occupants of the house – Phillips – with an “arrest

warrant” which they patently knew they did not possess.

50. Only seconds after threatening Phillips with arrest, police rammed down Phillips

door with a battering ram attached to a truck, threw stun grenades into the house, and

overwhelmed the stunned and frightened Phillips with police officers wearing body armor and

carrying assault weapons.

51. A reasonable officer in the position of Cutrone and other members of the police

force that raided Phillips’ home would not have deployed a small army of police officers, given

Phillips only seconds to respond to warnings, and then used a motorized battering ram and stun

grenades, to serve a simple search warrant.

52. As a result of the actions of Officer Cutrone and other Unknown Officers, acting

both individually and as co-conspirators, the Plaintiff was deprived her of rights, privileges and

immunities under the United States Constitution, including but limited to, the Fourth and

Fourteenth Amendments, and of the laws of the State of Illinois.

53. As a further direct and proximate result of the Police Officers’ actions, Plaintiff

suffered damages including pain and suffering, mental trauma, loss of liberty, extensive damage

to property, damage to reputation, legal expenses, and further and other injuries and damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SHARNIA PHILLIPS demands judgment against Defendant

ANTHONY CUTRONE and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-CONSPIRATORS

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in an amount to be determined at trial, punitive damages, attorneys

fees, costs, and other such relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

COUNT V – CITY OF CHICAGO

9
 Case: 1:18-cv-00316 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/16/18 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:1

54. Plaintiff restates and realleges Paragraphs 7 through 36 as though fully set forth

herein.

55. At all times mentioned herein, the Police Officers and the CITY OF CHICAGO

were acting under color of state law.

56. Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO, at all times relevant hereto, has with deliberate

indifference maintained a policy of inadequate training and safeguards for officers concerning

the constitutional rights of citizens, thereby causing the Police Officers to engage in unlawful

conduct.

57. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff was deprived of

her rights, privileges and immunities under the United States Constitution, including but limited

to, the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and of the laws of the State of Illinois.

58. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff suffered

damages including pain and suffering, mental trauma, loss of liberty, extensive damage to

property, damage to reputation, legal expenses, and further and other injuries and damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SHARNIA PHILLIPS demands Judgment against Defendant

CITY OF CHICAGO, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in an amount to be determined at trial,

punitive damages, attorneys fees, costs, and other such relief as this Court deems just and

equitable.

COUNT VI – STATE LAW TORTS

59. Plaintiff reincorporates and realleges Paragraphs 7 through 36 as if fully set forth

herein.

60. Defendant Police Officers are liable to the Plaintiff for the state law claims of

false imprisonment, malicious and/or wrongful prosecution, abuse of process, conspiracy,

intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery.

61. As a direct and proximate result of foregoing willful and wanton and/or

intentional acts and/or omissions of the Police Officers, Plaintiff suffered damages, including

bodily injury, pain and suffering, and physical and mental trauma, loss of liberty, extensive

damage to property, damage to reputation, loss of property, legal expenses, and other injuries and

damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SHARNIA PHILLIPS demands Judgment against Defendants

ANTHONY CUTRONE and other UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS and/or CO-CONSPIRATORS

in an amount to be determined at trial, punitive damages, attorneys fees, costs, and other such

relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,
SHARNIA PHILLIPS

By: /s/ Peter A. Cantwell

11