Minute Grder Form (06/97)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

(0)

Name of Assigned Judge James B. Moran Sitting Judge if Other
or Magistrate Judge than Assigned Judge
CASE NUMBER 01C 5417 DATE 11/19/2001
CASE Daniel Crosby et al. Vs. Bd of Trustees of Ill. etc. et al.
TITLE

[In the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g., plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature

of the motion being presented.]

ay

MOTION:
Memorandum Opinion and Order
DOCKET ENTRY:
qd) Oo Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above.]
(2) Oo Brief in support of motion due
(3) Oo Answer brief to motion due___. Reply to answer briefdue__.
(4) Oo Ruling/Hearingon_____—sset fort
(5) Oo Status hearing[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on__ set for_at
(6) og Pretrial conference[held/continued to] [set for/re-sct for]on___setfor__— ss at__.
(a) Oo Trial[set for/re-set for]on____at
(8) o [Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to___—_at__.
(9) ia) This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]
CIFRCP4(m) (General Rule 21 CFRCP41(a)(1) CUFRCP41(a)(2).
(10) = [Other docket entry] Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order. City College now moves to dismiss

counts II and III and the individual defendants join in the motion to dismiss count II. The motion to
dismiss count II is granted and to dismiss count III is denied. Status hearing set for December 13, 2001 at

9:45am.

| [For further detail see order attached to the original minute order.]

No notices required, advised in open court

No notices required. ,
4 umber of notices

Notices mailed by judge's staff,

Notified counsel by telephone. medio NE
i 7
Docketing to mail notices.

Q)
Mait AO 450 form. s

FingbeGp fly initials

Copy to judge/magistrate judge.

date mailed notice

courtroom
WAH deputy's
initials

Date/time received in ;
central Clerk’s Office mailing deputy initials



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION
DANIEL CROSBY and MICHAEL SHAWN
CHISM,
Plaintiffs, No. 01 C 5417
v. Judge Moran

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ILLINOIS
COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT 508,
a/k/a THE CITY COLLEGES OF CHICAGO
DAN DAVIS and KATHLEEN WELCH,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) Magistrate Judge Nolan
)
)
)
)
)

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION

Plaintiffs contend that they were former employees of college athletic departments who
were not paid the compensation to which they were entitled. According to plaintiff Crosby, he
was told, falsely, that he was the Malcolm X basketball coach (although he then alleges that he
singlehandedly coached the team); that he worked at least thirty-five hours a week and often in
excess of forty hours; and that he was paid only for twenty to twenty-five hours each week.
According to plaintiff Chism, he was hired to be the assistant athletic director at Kennedy-King
at an annual salary of $32,000 and that arrangements would be made to get him an additional
position of academic counselor. Instead, he was paid $15 per hour for less hours per week than
he actually worked and he never did get the other position. From those circumstances, they
allege an FLSA violation in Count I, fraud in Count II and breach of contract in Count III. All

these counts are alleged against City Colleges and two individual defendants are also named in

|


Count II. City College now moves to dismiss Counts II and II] and the individual defendants join
in the motion to dismiss Count II. The motion to dismiss Count II is granted and to dismiss
Count III is denied.

Both plaintiffs allege they were not paid the compensation to which they were entitled.
That is enough for a contract claim (although, with respect to Crosby, it apparently doesn’t add
anything to his FLSA claim). We do not understand, however, his fraud claim. He says he was
supposed to be head coach, he was head coach, and City Colleges agrees, Chism’s fraud claim
has a little more heft to it, but not enough. He alleges that certain promises were not kept but he
does not allege that when they were made Welch knew them to be false and made the
misrepresentation as part of a continuing scheme to defraud. He also relies upon Welch’s
representations “from time to time” that she was trying to get him additional compensation
without specifying where or when and without alleging that the representations were untrue. For
all we know from the allegations, she may well have been trying even though she did not

succeed.

.&. B. Wor —
jenior Judge, U.S, District Court

Dated: November 19, 2001

-2-