1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION

Denard and Lajuan Wade, collectively and ) 

and on behalf of their minor son, Darius ) 

Wade ) 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) 

) No: 12 CV 2276 

v. ) 

) 

 ) 

Board of Education of Proviso Township ) 

High Schools District 209, Milton Patch, in ) 

his capacity as Principal of Proviso East ) 

High School, Daniel Johnson, in his capacity ) 

as Assistant Principal, of Proviso East High ) 

School, Emmanuel “Chris” Welch, in ) 

his capacity as School Board 209 President, ) 

Jeanette Thomas, Cook County Sheriff ) 

Michael Tom Dart and the Cook County ) 

Sheriff’s Office, Cook County Sheriff’s Police ) 

Department and Michael Castaldo, Jr., ) 

 ) 

Defendants. ) 

INTRODUCTION

1. Denard Wade brings and Lajuan Wade bring this civil rights lawsuit under the 

Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, individually and on 

behalf of their son. They seek declaratory relief, injunctive relief, compensatory 

and punitive damages. 

2. At all times relevant, herein, his son, Darius Wade was in his sophomore year, 

attending Proviso East High School, in Maywood, Illinois, when he was 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1
2

accused of assaulting a teacher in the hallway outside of her classroom on 

September 23, 2009. 

3. Without thorough or complete investigation, Darius was suspended from 

school from September 24, 2009 through October 7, 2009, subsequently 

expelled and criminal proceedings were instituted against him for battery and 

aggravated battery. 

4. Denard Wade, Lajuan Wade and their son, Darius Wade were deprived of his 

constitutional rights of procedural and substantive due process and equal 

protection of the laws in violation of his rights under the Fourteenth 

Amendment and the Constitution of the State of Illinois when he was expelled 

from public school, refused alternative education, and prosecuted. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to the Civil Rights Act, 42 

U.S.C. §1983 and 1988; 28 U.S.C. §1331 and 1323(3); and the Fourteenth 

Amendment of United States Constitution, the Eighth Amendment of the 

United States Constitution and supplemental jurisdiction under U.S.C. Section 

1367. 

 

6. Venue is proper in this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because the events 

or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in Maywood, Illinois, 

within the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. 

THE PARTIES

7. Plaintiff, Denard Wade, appears individually and next friend of his minor son, 

Darius Wade who was fifteen years old at the time of this incident. 

8. Plaintiff, LaJuan Wade, appears individually and next friend of her minor son, 

Darius Wade who was fifteen years old at the time of this incident. 

9. Defendant Board of Education of Proviso Township High Schools District 

209 (hereinafter “School Board 209”), is a school district operating in Illinois 

under the color of stat law and is located in Cook County, Illinois. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 2 of 13 PageID #:2
3

10.Defendant, Milton Patch, is a principal of Proviso East High School, and an 

employee of Proviso Township High Schools District 209. He is sued in his 

individual and official capacity. 

11.Defendant, Daniel Johnson, is an assistant principal of Proviso East High 

School, and an employee of Proviso Township High Schools District 209. He 

is sued in his individual and official capacity. 

12.Defendant, Emmanuel “Chris” Welch, is Board President of the Board of 

Education of Proviso Township High Schools District 209. He is sued in his 

individual and official capacity. 

13. Defendant, Cook County Sheriff, Tom Dart and the Cook County Sheriff’s 

office, is a municipal corporation within the State of Illinois, and was at all 

times material to this complaint, the employer of Cook County Sheriff’s Police 

Department Officers, and Cook County Sheriff’s Department Officers. 

14. Defendant, Cook County Sheriff’s Police Department Officers, were 

employed by the County of Cook and Cook County Sheriff Michael Sheehan, 

and is an agent of the County of Cook and Cook County Sheriff Michael 

Sheehan, who was at all times material to this complaint acting within the scope 

of his employment and under the color of law. The defendant is being sued 

individually. 

15.Defendant, Michael Castaldo, Jr., is a hearing officer for and employee of 

Proviso Township High Schools District 209. He is sued in his individual and 

official capacity. 

16.Defendant, Jeanette Thomas, is a retired teacher, and at all times relevant to 

this complaint, a citizen of the United States, and resident of Chicago, Illinois. 

Jeanette Thomas was the alleged victim in the incident underlying Darius 

Wade’s expulsion. 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

17.Prior to this incident, Darius had not been the subject of any serious discipline, 

he was a student athlete, and by all accounts a good student. At no point has 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 3 of 13 PageID #:3
4

Darius ever been, nor is he now, a member of any gang or involved in any 

gang activities. He had no criminal history prior to this accident. 

18. On September 23, 2009, Darius was in the hall by the doorway of a classroom 

at Proviso East High School, trying to get the attention of a female student. 

19. The teacher, Jeanette Thomas, came to the doorway, told Darius to move and 

pushed Darius in the chest. 

20.Thomas then closed the door behind her. 

21.Thomas then proceeded into the hallway reached for Darius’ identification and 

grabbed him in the chest area. 

22.At which time, Darius moved away and followed Thomas’ instruction to leave 

from the hallway. 

23.From the force of her own actions in attacking Darius, Thomas slipped and fell 

to the floor. 

24. Thomas was not injured and did not receive medical attention. 

25.All of the Jeanette Thomas’ actions in making physical contact with Darius are 

against school policy and procedures. 

26.At not time did Darius approach the teacher or initiate contact with her. 

27.Yet, Darius was immediately suspended from school from September 24, 2009 

through October 7, 2009. 

28.He was subsequently expelled and criminal proceedings were instituted against 

him, as well. 

29.On October 9, 2009, a discipline hearing was held before Defendant Michael 

Castaldo, Jr. for the Board of Education for Proviso Township High Schools 

District 209. 

30.At the discipline hearing, Darius, both his parents, the Proviso East High 

School assistant principal, Daniel Johnson, Jeanette Thomas, mathematics 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 4 of 13 PageID #:4
5

teacher and alleged victim, all testified. A preserve order was entered on all 

evidence from the hearing. 

31.In addition to the testimony, the Defendants, on behalf of Proviso East High 

School, presented a complete set of photos from the incident as exhibits and a 

video of the incident. 

32.On October 9, 2009, the hearing officer issued a report. The report included a 

summary of the witness testimonies, but excluded the testimony of Plaintiff 

Denard Wade and LaJuan Wade. 

33. Castaldo, Jr., found that the evidence presented supported a recommendation 

that the case be referred to School Board 209 for appropriate discipline action. 

34.In essence, the recommendation was that Darius be expelled and School Board 

209 followed through on the recommendation. 

35.On October 19, 2009, a public school board meeting was held, where Plaintiffs 

Denard Wade and Lajuan Wade attempted to inform the Board about the 

unfairness of the hearing. 

36.Plaintiff, Denard Wade was cut-off by Defendant Emmaunel “Chris” Welch 

and not allowed to speak any further. 

37.Rather than conduct further investigation, the Defendant Board expelled 

Darius on or about October 19, 2009. 

38.Darius was also not allowed to return to school for two years, not allowed on 

the premises of any of the District 209 facility. As a result, he could not attend 

a public school in the area and he was not offered alternative school. 

39. However, On July 16, 2010, in a separate proceeding, the explusion was 

vacated with a chancery court finding that the penalty was unreasonable and 

not related to the needs of the agency. The matter was remanded to the 

Defendant Board to impose a penalty consistent with the Court’s opinion. 

40. Nevertheless, the Defendant Board refused to change the expulsion. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 5 of 13 PageID #:5
6

41.In addition to being expelled, criminal charges were filed against Darius for 

battery and aggravated battery based on certain evidence provided and other 

evidence that was withheld by Defendants. 

42.The criminal matter went to trial on March 17, 2010. At the trial, Judge Walsh 

found Darius guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 

43. In further interference with his education, the Defendants immediately 

contacted his current school, St. Joseph High School, to inform them that 

Darius was found guilty. 

44.As part of the criminal case, two subpoenas were issued and a Court order was 

entered about Defendant School Board 209 turning over the expulsion hearing 

transcript, and any and all pictures and photos from the incident. 

45.Defendant School Board 209 consistently denied that the transcript from the 

expulsion hearing on October 9, 2009 existed. 

46. After the guilty decision by Judge Walsh, the transcript from the expulsion 

hearing on October 9, 2009, surfaced in the chancery case that was going on at 

the same time. 

47.Given this, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion for new trial and informed the 

Court that Defendant School Board, in defiance of the preserve order, failed to 

produce complete photos from the incident and the expulsion hearing 

transcript. 

48.As a result, Plaintiff was granted a new trial. 

49.Judge Walsh found that Defendants had manipulated and/or destroyed 

evidence resulting in the Plaintiff not being able to defend himself fully against 

the charges against him. 

50. On May 20, 2011, Darius had a second trial. 

51.Judge Walsh considered the conduct of Defendant School Board 209, including 

but not limited to the destruction of photos, withholding the transcript, 

padding Darius’ record and the inconsistent statements by Defendant Thomas. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 6 of 13 PageID #:6
7

52.Based on the totality of the circumstances and evidence, Judge Walsh found 

Darius not guilty and he was vindicated from all charges. 

53.In further interference with his education, against the Chancery Judge’s opinion 

that the punishment was excessive, and order that another punishment be 

instituted, Defendant’s failed to offer another, less severe punishment. 

54.Due to this incident, Darius was not permitted to attend another public school 

in the area and was forced to enroll at St. Joseph High School, a private school 

where his parents have to pay tuition. Darius had to stop playing sports and get 

a job to help his parents pay for his tuition and private school expenses. 

55.As a result of this incident, Darius has suffered and continues to suffer ongoing 

harm, including but not limited to, humiliation, missed school, a permanent 

expulsion on his school record, and emotional distress. 

56. Denard and LaJuan Wade have also suffered emotional distress because of this 

incident, as well as inconvenience, disruption of his work schedule, tremendous 

financial losses (legal fees, tuition for St. Joseph High School, property 

foreclosure, etc.), pain and suffering to all family members, and continuing 

other harm and suffering. 

COUNT I

(42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS v. ALL

DEFENDANTS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as though fully set forth 

herein. 

57. Defendants by their actions and omissions as alleged in this Complaint, violated 

Plaintiff’s rights to substantive due process guaranteed, by the Due Process Clause of 

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits 

arbitrary state conduct. Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. sec. 

1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

58. Defendants were intentional, malicious, willful, wanton, callous, and showed 

reckless disregard for the Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment Rights. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 7 of 13 PageID #:7
8

59. Plaintiff claims expenses and attorneys fees from the said Defendants as provided 

by 42 U.S.C. sec. 1985. 

COUNT II

(42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS v. ALL 

DEFENDANTS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as though fully set forth 

herein. 

57. Defendants by their actions and omissions as alleged in this Complaint, violated 

Plaintiff’s rights to procedural due process guaranteed, by the Due Process Clause of 

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits 

arbitrary state conduct. Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. sec. 

1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

58. Defendants were intentional, malicious, willful, wanton, callous, and showed 

reckless disregard for the Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment Rights. 

59. Plaintiff claims expenses and attorneys fees from the said Defendants as provided 

by 42 U.S.C. sec. 1985. 

COUNT III

(VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE V. ALL 

DEFENDANTS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as though fully set forth 

herein. 

57. Defendants by their actions and omissions as alleged in this Complaint, violated 

Plaintiff’s rights to Equal Protection guaranteed, by the Equal Protection Clause the 

Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits arbitrary 

state conduct. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 and 

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

58. Defendants were intentional, malicious, willful, wanton, callous, and showed 

reckless disregard for the Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment Rights. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 8 of 13 PageID #:8
9

59. Plaintiff claims expenses and attorneys fees from the said Defendants as provided 

by 42 U.S.C. sec. 1985. 

COUNT IV

(VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE- “CLASS OF 

ONE” V. ALL DEFENDANTS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as though fully set forth 

herein. 

57. Defendants intentionally treated Darius differently from others similarly 

situated. 

58. There is no rational basis for the difference in treatment. 

59. Defendants by their actions and omissions as alleged in this Complaint, violated 

Plaintiff’s rights to Equal Protection guaranteed, by the Equal Protection Clause the 

Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits arbitrary 

state conduct. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 and 

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

60. Defendants were intentional, malicious, willful, wanton, callous, and showed 

reckless disregard for the Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment Rights. 

61. Plaintiff claims expenses and attorneys fees from the said Defendants as 

provided by 42 U.S.C. sec. 1985. 

COUNT V

(42 U.S.C. SECTION 1983-FALSE ARREST V. COOK COUNTY SHERIFF 

TOM DART, COOK COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE AND THE COOK

COUNTY SHERIFF’S POLICE DEPARTMENT AND OFFICERS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as set forth herein. 

57. The above acts of the Defendants, were willfully and wantonly done without 

probable cause and was a direct and proximate cause of Darius’ pain, suffering and 

mental anguish, and therefore violated the Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment right to 

be free from unreasonable arrest, search and seizure. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 9 of 13 PageID #:9
10

COUNT VI

(EIGHTH AMENDMENT-CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT V. 

SCHOOL BOARD 209, EMMANUEL “CHRIS” WELCH, AND DAN 

JOHNSON) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as set forth herein. 

57. The above acts of the Defendants, were willfully and wantonly done without 

probable cause and was a direct and proximate cause of Darius’ pain, suffering 

and mental anguish, and therefore violated the Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment right to 

be free from cruel , excessive and unusual punishment. 

COUNT VII

(CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CIVIL RIGHTS V. ALL DEFENDANTS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as set forth herein. 

59.The above acts of the Defendants, acted together for the purpose of 

violating Darius’ civil rights by falsely arresting him, pursuing charges against him 

although he was not the aggressor, and expelling Darius Wade. 

60.In furtherance of the conspiracy, Defendants hid and manipulated evidence 

against Darius for the purpose of supporting the wrongful expulsion and criminal 

charges against Darius. 

COUNT VIII

(MALICIOUS PROSECUTION UNDER ILLINOIS LAW V. COOK 

COUNTY SHERIFF TOM DART, COOK COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE 

AND THE COOK COUNTY SHERIFF’S POLICE DEPARTMENT AND

OFFICERS) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as though fully set forth 

herein. 

57. The above prosecution was initiated to cover up the withholding of the 

evidence, in the expulsion and criminal proceedings of Darius. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 10 of 13 PageID #:10
11

58. Evidence was withheld which began the prosecution of Darius and false 

statements were given against Darius to the prosecution and the Court. 

59. The unjustifiable prosecution was resolved in Darius’ behalf and, therefore, 

said prosecution was in violation of the Illinois law. 

60. The unjustifiable prosecution of Darius was done willfully and wantonly 

and was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the Plaintiff. 

COUNT IX

(NEGLIGENT TRAINING AND SUPERVISION CLAIM V. SCHOOL

BOARD 209) 

1-56. Plaintiff alleges and realleges paragraphs 1 through 56 as though fully set forth 

herein. 

57. Defendants, individually and through their agents, and as individual defendants, 

had a duty to train and supervise employees in order to protect the minor children 

attending Proviso East High School, including Darius Wade. 

58. Defendants, by and through their agents, and as individual defendants had an 

established policy that teachers were not to initiate contact with students and if an 

issue arose, they were to contact school security. 

59. Defendants, by and through their agents, had a duty to train teachers on this 

policy and assure that they follow said policy. 

60. However, Defendants breached their duty to adequately train and/or supervise 

Thomas. 

61. Defendant, Jeanette Thomas, initiated contact first with Darius by grabbing him in 

the chest and did not contact security. 

62. As a result, Defendant Thomas, was allowed to violate the school policies and 

procedures. 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 11 of 13 PageID #:11
12

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully pray for the following relief: 

1. A finding that Defendants violated Plaintiffs’ rights; 

2. Compensatory damages, to be determined by a jury, against all Defendants; 

3. Punitive damages against the individual Defendants in the individual capacities; 

4. Expungement of all law enforcement, academic, or discipline records of Darius 

Wade related to this incident; 

5. Such injunctive relief as the Court deems necessary and proper; 

6. Reasonable attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. SECTION 1988, including the fees 

and costs of experts that are incurred in prosecuting this action, if any; and 

7. Any other relief to which Plaintiffs may be entitled. 

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL COUNTS.

Respectfully submitted, 

 _____s/Danielle McCain_______

 One of the Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

 

Danielle McCain 

THOMAS MCCAIN LAW LLC 

4655 S. King Drive – Suite 105 

Chicago, IL 60653 

(773) 373-8703 phone 

(773)373-8701 fax 

dmccain@thomasmccainlaw.com 

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 12 of 13 PageID #:12
13

Case: 1:12-cv-02276 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/27/12 Page 13 of 13 PageID #:13