1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR NORTHERN ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
CARMEN A. CONSOLINO, ) CASE: ___
PLAINTIFF, ) JUDGE ___
v. ) MAG. _____
COOK COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE, )
BRIAN TOWNE, )
THOMAS DART, )
ROBERT EGAN, )
DEFENDANTS. )

COMPLAINT FOR MONETARY DAMAGES

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Consolino alleges a 42 U.S.C. 1983 violation as well as pendant
state law claim for Negligence. Plaintiff was invited by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) to join a task force (temporary assignment or detail).
Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants denied him the detail assignment
because he testified against the Cook County Sheriffs Department and Thomas
Dart in a Shakman relief order case. Plaintiff is a United States Marine (USMC)
(still serving in the Marine reserves). His experience in the USMC in a
counterintelligence role makes him uniquely qualified for the FBI Task Force
position.
JURISDICTION & VENUE
(1) Jurisdiction of this court arises under 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1337; 42
U.S.C. 2000e, and 28 U.S.C. 1367.
(2) Venue is had through 28 U.S.C. 1391, the events or omissions
giving rise to the claims having occurred in this district.
Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1
2


PARTIES
(3) Plaintiff Carmen Consolino is a legal adult and a resident of Will
County, Illinois. He is employed by Defendant Cook County Sheriffs
Office\Department as a Commander in the Department of Corrections.
Plaintiff was harmed by Defendant in Cook County, Illinois.
(4) Defendant Thomas Dart is a legal adult and is sued in his
individual capacity. He is believed to be a resident of Cook County, Illinois and
employed by the Cook County Sheriffs Office\Department as its elected Sheriff.
Defendant harmed Plaintiff in Cook County, Illinois.
(5) Defendant Brian Towne is a legal adult and is sued in his
individual capacity. He is believed to be a resident of Cook County, Illinois and
at one time employed by the Cook County Sheriffs Office. Defendant harmed
Plaintiff in Cook County, Illinois.
(6) Defendant Cook County Sheriffs Office\Department is an agency
of Cook County government with a principle place of business at 50 West
Washington Street, Chicago. Defendant harmed Plaintiff in Cook County,
Illinois.
(7) Defendant Robert Egan is a legal adult and is sued in his
individual capacity. He is believed to be a resident of Cook County. Defendant
harmed Plaintiff in Cook County, Illinois.


Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:2
3

FACTS
(8) Plaintiff holds the rank of commander in the Cook County Sheriffs
Office\Department (Department).
(9) Plaintiff is a United States Marine. He presently serves in the
Marine Reserves. As a reservist, Plaintiff serves as a human intelligence and
counterintelligence specialist.
(10) On January 6, 2012, Plaintiff testified in a Shakman
1
hearing in
Trzos v. Cook County Sheriffs Office, SRO #2009-1160.
(11) Due to Plaintiffs credentials, on February 9, 2012, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) requested of the Sheriffs Department that
Plaintiff be approved for a detail with the FBI as a part of a Chicago Division
Joint Terrorism Task Force.
(12) On that day, Plaintiff began formally requesting information from
the Cook County Sheriffs Office regarding the transfer to the FBI.
(13) By April 2, 2012, the Cook County Sheriffs Office had not taken
action as to the FBIs request.
(14) Therefore, Plaintiff spoke with Defendant Thomas Dart on April 2,
2012. Defendant Dart informed Plaintiff that he had notice of the request but

1
The 1972 Shakman Consent Decree (when it was applicable to Cook County) did prohibit the
County from considering political activity or affiliation when making employment decisions
concerning current employees. Shakman v. Democratic Org., 435 F.2d 267 (7th Cir.1970).


Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:3
4

that he hadnt been able to do the requisite paperwork on behalf of Cook
County Sheriffs Office.
(15) Plaintiff repeatedly contacted Defendant members of management,
namely Egan and Towne (not inclusive), requesting that the Department
approve the detail.
(16) On May 8, 2012, Plaintiff was informed by a member of the
Sheriffs Department management that the FBIs request was rescinded.
(17) On May 22, 2012, Plaintiff learned that the according to the FBI, it
(FBI) was unaware that the offer was rescinded.
(18) On May 25, 2012, Plaintiff again reached out to Sheriffs
Department management. Plaintiff contacted Defendant Brian Towne,
Defendant Thomas Dart, and Cook County Director John Harrington
requesting clarification as to why the Sheriffs Office\Department was not
complying with the FBIs invitation. Plaintiff did not receive an answer.
(19) On June 19, 2013, another Cook County Sheriffs Department
officer was detailed to the FBI.
(20) Defendant Cook County Sheriffs Office, Defendant Dart, and
Defendant Towne had still not informed Plaintiff as to why the Department had
not approved the FBIs request as to Plaintiff.
(21) Plaintiff filed a grievance with the Office of Professional Review,
and later with the Cook County Office of the Independent Inspector General in
an effort to cause Defendants to approve the FBIs request.
Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:4
5

(22) Plaintiff was transferred from his coveted position to a less
desirable position. Plaintiff defines the transfer as retaliation for having filed a
grievance.
(23) In June of 2014, Plaintiff was told by the Department (see below)
that his 2012 grievance was determined to be not sustained. The e-mail
reads in part:
OPR Complaint 2012-6341
Nicholas Scouffas (Sheriff)
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 7:21 PM
To: Carmen Consolino (Sheriff)
Dear Commander,

Page 1of 1
I was contacted by Assistant General Counsel Daniel Korso concerning the results of an OPR complaint you
previously filed relating to an FBI detail. Dan indicated you did not know the results of that investigation. The
complaint you filed was found NOT SUSTAINED by special investigator, Maureen Hannon, Supervisor of the
Conflicts Unit, at the Cook County State's Attorney's Office. Sorry for any delay in relaying this information to
you. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you.


Nicholas Scouffas
Deputy General Counsel
Cook County Sheriff's Office
SO W. Washington, 7th Floor
Chicago IL 60602
312-603-3396
nicholas.scouffas@cookcountyil.gov

(24) As of July 2014, Plaintiff still has yet to be notified as to the status
of the invitation from the FBI.

COUNT I: VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983 (First Amendment)
Applies to Defendants Dart, Egan and Towne

(25) Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by reference, the
allegations in all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, especially the section
Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:5
6

entitled FACTS, with the same force and effect as if herein set forth. The facts
section is to be read as Paragraph 1 of this count.
(26) Plaintiff testified against the Sheriffs Department on January 6,
2012, at a Shakman hearing.
(27) Plaintiff testified as to matters of public concern and public
interest. Plaintiffs speech did not concern private matters.
(28) Under color of law, Defendants Dart, Egan and Towne personally
participated in the unlawful conduct that caused the Plaintiff to suffer a
constitutional injury.
(29) As retaliation for having testified under color of law, Defendants
Dart, Egan and Towne have not (did not) allow for Plaintiff to be detailed to the
FBI.
(30) As retaliation for having testified and subsequently filed a
grievance, Defendants Dart, Egan and Towne did cause Plaintiff to be
transferred to Division 11.
(31) Defendants conduct was and is the proximate cause and
substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs harm.
(32) Plaintiff suffered harm to include pain and suffering; loss of career
opportunities; and legal related costs.
WHEREFORE, and that there is sought, judgment against all Defendants
for actual, general, special, compensatory damages in the amount of $50,000
and further demands judgment against said Defendants Dart, Egan and Towne
Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:6
7

for punitive damages in the amount of $50,000, plus the costs of this action,
including attorney's fees, and such other relief deemed to be just and equitable.

COUNT II: NEGLIGENCE, FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE
(33) Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates by reference, the
allegations in all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, especially the section
entitled FACTS, with the same force and effect as if herein set forth. The facts
section is to be read as Paragraph 1 of this count.
(34) On July 11, 2013, Plaintiff complained to the Sheriffs Department.
He asserted in part that because he testified against the Sheriffs Department
in a Shakman hearing, he has been (continues to be) denied approval to
participate on an FBI task force.
(35) Based upon reasonable information and belief, Defendants,
especially Mr. Egan and Mr. Towne, failed to cause an investigation of Plaintiffs
allegations (represented as a grievance, supra.).
(36) Defendants have failed to show that a thorough investigation
occurred.
(37) As retaliation for having testified at a Shakman hearing and for
filing a complaint\grievance, Plaintiff was transferred to from his coveted
position to a less coveted position.
(38) Defendants conduct in not causing or conducting a thorough
investigation was willful and wanton.
(39) Defendants conduct was and is the proximate cause and
substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs harm.
Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:7
8

(40) Plaintiff suffered harm to include pain and suffering; loss of career
opportunities; and legal related costs.
WHEREFORE, and that there is sought, judgment against all Defendants
for actual, general, special, compensatory damages in the amount of $50,000
and further demands judgment against said Defendants Dart, Egan Towne for
punitive damages in the amount of $50,000, plus the costs of this action,
including attorney's fees, and such other relief deemed to be just and equitable.


Plaintiff hereby makes a jury demand.

s\CHRISTOPHER COOPER, PhD, ESQ., Lead Attorney for Plaintiff
s\MICHELLE RONAY, ESQ., One of Plaintiffs Attorneys
LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTOPHER COOPER, INC.
79 W. Monroe, Suite 1213, Chicago, IL 60603 [or]
3620 West 80th Lane Merrillville, IN 46410
Tel: 312 473 2968; FAX: 866 334 7458 E-Mail: cooperlaw3234@gmail.com

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, I Carmen A. Consolino, being duly sworn on oath,
state that I have read the foregoing Complaint and that I know the contents
thereof, and the same are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Plaintiffs Signature: s\Carmen A. Consolino Date: July 18, 2014




CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: The undersigned affirms that s/he filed the
foregoing on ECF on July 18, 2014. s\Michelle Ronay
Case: 1:14-cv-05526 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:8