Counts II and III
The court dismissed the Monell municipal-liability counts at the pleading stage in its November 4, 2024 order, identified as Electronic Case Filing (ECF) docket entry 49 in the later ruling.
Justice for Aggie
Court Case
Maynard v. City of Chicago et al. · No. 1:24-cv-03612 · Northern District of Illinois
Latest filing collected: September 17, 2026. The procedural account below is tied to the cited orders and filings. The September 17 response opposes the plaintiff’s objections; the materials collected here do not include a ruling deciding them. Defendants’ response identifies March 1, 2027 as the trial date (p. 4); that date is reported from the filing, not independently verified against a later scheduling order.
Procedural posture
What the court has—and has not—decided
This summary is provided to prevent pending allegations from being mistaken for established facts.
Counts IV and VI
On February 9, 2026, the court entered summary judgment on the willful-and-wanton-misconduct count and the defamation count.
Counts I, V, VII, VIII, and IX
Those claims survived the motions addressed in the February 9 ruling. Denial of summary judgment means the claims were not resolved at that stage; it is not a finding that defendants are liable.
September 17, 2026 · ECF No. 202
The City and Mostek respond
Defendants ask Judge Sunil R. Harjani to deny Maynard’s objections and affirm the August 26 order. They argue that the court’s discovery-management authority supports the restriction and that public dissemination risks prejudice to the jury trial and disciplinary proceedings. They interpret the order as allowing trial preparation and settlement uses, while barring publicity outside the litigation (pp. 3–7). That interpretation is their argument; the response does not amend or clarify the order.
Read the complete response · 9 pages ↗Chronology
Court chronology
The timeline is intentionally limited to dates supported by the linked public materials.
- 1
Amended pleading
The First Amended Verified Complaint was filed. It contained allegations and claims, not adjudicated facts.
- 2
Partial dismissal
The court dismissed Counts II and III, which concerned Monell municipal-liability theories.
- 3
Summary-judgment ruling
The court granted summary judgment on Counts IV and VI and denied summary judgment on Counts I, V, VII, VIII, and IX. The surviving claims remained unresolved; the ruling did not establish liability.
- 4
COPA-document ruling
The court rejected the City’s asserted Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) grounds for treating the COPA documents as confidential, while limiting the plaintiff’s use of those discovery materials to presenting evidence at trial. The reports themselves are not published in this archive.
- 5
Objections to the COPA-use restriction
Plaintiff filed Rule 72(a) objections (ECF No. 200), asking the district judge to modify or set aside the trial-only restriction. He requests clarification permitting ordinary litigation uses or, alternatively, removal of the restriction prohibiting all non-trial use. These are requests for relief, not a subsequent ruling.
- 6
Defendants oppose the objections
The City and Mostek filed their joint response (ECF No. 202), asking the district judge to affirm the restriction. This filing does not decide the objections.