1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

WILLIE TALLY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

) 12 c 5263

CITY OF CHICAGO, a municipal corporation, )

OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS ) Judge Aspen

and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS, )

)

Defendants. )

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, WILLIE TALLY, by and through his attorneys, MARK PARTS and 

FAITH H. SPENCER of PARTS & SPENCER, LTD., for his First Amended Complaint 

against Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO, a municipal corporation, and individual 

Defendants OFFICER JOEL HOWARD (#1684), OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS (#9773) 

and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS (#10581), alleges as follows:

THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff WILLIE TALLY is a resident of Chicago, Illinois.

2. Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO is a legal entity incorporated under the 

laws of the State of Illinois.

3. Defendant officers OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, OFFICER BRIAN 

HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS are City of Chicago police officers, 

who, at times pertinent hereto, acted in their capacity as officers and employees of 

Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO’s Police Department and acted under color of law.
2

JURISDICTION and VENUE

4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s federal claims 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 1343(a). This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s 

state claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, and §1441. This Court has personal 

jurisdiction over Defendants as they are residents of Illinois and all actions complained of 

herein occurred in Illinois.

5. Venue is proper in this District because all the conduct complained of 

herein occurred in this District.

SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

6. On the evening of September 4, 2011, Plaintiff WILLIE TALLY was 

about to enter the McDonald’s restaurant at 79th Street and King Blvd. in Chicago when 

OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, blocked his way and started verbally harassing him. 

7. Plaintiff WILLIE TALLY attempted to walk around OFFICER JOEL 

HOWARD several times, but was not able to do so, as OFFICER JOEL HOWARD 

continued to verbally harass him and physically assaulted him. Plaintiff then turned away 

from the restaurant and went back to his car to drive home. As Plaintiff was on his way 

home he became aware that he was being followed by OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, who 

bumped his vehicle and continued to follow him.

8. Plaintiff WILLIE TALLY arrived at his home in the 8100 block of 

Ingleside in Chicago and went to enter the front door. As he did so, OFFICER JOEL 

HOWARD kicked the front door open, followed Plaintiff in, put a gun to Plaintiff’s head 

and told Plaintiff he was under arrest.

9. OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS then 

entered Plaintiff’s residence and grabbed Plaintiff WILLIE TALLY. OFFICER BRIAN 
3

HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS then cuffed Plaintiff and placed him in a 

police vehicle.

10. Plaintiff was taken to the Chicago Police Department station, where he 

was held for several hours and issued three traffic citations by OFFICER BRIAN 

HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS.

11. Plaintiff appeared at court on the three traffic citations on October 12, 

2011 and the citations were dismissed at that time.

COUNT I

 (42 U.S.C. § 1983, Excessive Force Claim)

12. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs 

as if set forth in full herein.

13. By all of the above, Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD used and 

caused to be used unjustified force against Plaintiff WILLIE TALLY. 

14. The above-described use of force by Defendant OFFICER JOEL 

HOWARD was in violation of Plaintiff’s rights pursuant to the Fourth and Fourteenth 

Amendments to the United States Constitution.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, awarding compensatory and punitive 

damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and such further relief as this Court deems 

just.

COUNT II

 (42 U.S.C. § 1983, Improper Seizure Claim)

15. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the foregoing 

paragraphs as if set forth in full herein.
4

16. The actions of Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD constituted an 

improper seizure of Plaintiff, in violation of rights guaranteed under the Fourth and 

Fourteenth Amendments.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, awarding compensatory and punitive 

damages, reasonable attorneys fees and costs, and such further relief as this Court deems 

just.

COUNT III

 (42 U.S.C. § 1983, False Arrest Claim)

17. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the foregoing 

paragraphs as if set forth in full herein.

18. The actions of OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS 

and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS constituted false arrest of Plaintiff, in violation of 

rights guaranteed under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER 

CHARICE WILLIAMS, awarding compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable 

attorneys fees and costs, and such further relief as this Court deems just.

COUNT IV

(42 U.S.C. § 1983, Unlawful Detention Claim)

19. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference the foregoing 

paragraphs as if set forth in full herein.

20. The actions of OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE 

WILLIAMS constituted unlawful detention of Plaintiff, in violation of rights guaranteed 

under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
5

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS, awarding 

compensatory and punitive damages, costs, and such further relief as this Court deems 

just.

COUNT V

 (Battery)

21. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs 

as if set forth in full herein.

22. The above-described harmful, unjustified and offensive conduct by

Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, acting within the scope of his employment by 

the City of Chicago, constituted battery under the common law of Illinois.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against the City of Chicago and Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD awarding 

compensatory damages, costs, and such further relief as this Court deems just.

COUNT VI

(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)

23. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs 

as if set forth in full herein.

24. The above conduct of Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, acting 

within the scope of his employment by the City of Chicago, was intentional and done 

with disregard for Plaintiff’s safety and rights. Said actions by OFFICER JOEL 

HOWARD were extreme, outrageous and caused and continue to cause Plaintiff to suffer 

pain and emotional distress.
6

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against the City of Chicago and Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD awarding 

compensatory damages, costs, and such further relief as this Court deems just.

COUNT VII

(Respondeat Superior)

25. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs 

as if set forth in full herein.

26. In committing the acts alleged in the preceding Counts V and VI, 

Defendant OFFICER JOEL HOWARD was a members, and agent of, the Chicago Police 

Department acting at all relevant times within the scope of their employment.

27. Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO is liable as principal for all Illinois state 

law torts committed by its agents.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO awarding compensatory damages, costs, and 

such further relief as this Court deems just.

COUNT VIII

(State Law Indemnification)

28. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs 

as if set forth in full herein.

29. Illinois law, 735 ILCS 10/9-102, provides that public entities are directed 

to pay any tort judgment for compensatory damages for which employees are liable 

within the scope of their employment activities. Defendants OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, 

OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS were employees of 

Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO who acted within the scope of their employment in 

committing the misconduct described herein.
7

30. Moreover, Plaintiff is a third-party beneficiary of a contract between 

Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO and the union(s) representing OFFICER JOEL 

HOWARD, OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS, in 

which contract Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO has obligated itself to pay for all 

judgments for compensatory damages, attorneys’ fees and costs against Defendants 

OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE 

WILLIAMS.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered in favor of him and 

against Defendant CITY OF CHICAGO for the amounts of any compensatory damages, 

attorneys and fees and costs awarded against Defendants OFFICER JOEL HOWARD, 

OFFICER BRIAN HARRIS and OFFICER CHARICE WILLIAMS.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all Counts that may be tried to a jury.

Respectfully submitted,

/s Mark Parts

Mark Parts

Parts & Spencer, Ltd.

130 North Garland Court

Suite 2005

Chicago, IL 60602

312-920-0990

mparts@pslegal.net

Illinois Atty. No.: 6203617

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, an attorney, hereby certifies that he caused a copy of the 

foregoing document to be served by ECF upon all counsel of record on September 4, 

2012.

/s Mark Parts