Michael Evans Loses Final Bid For A New Trial

Michael Evans has lost in his final bid for a new trial. Evans sued ten former Chicago police officers claiming they framed him for the rape and murder of nine-year old Lisa Cabassa back in 1976. Evans had spent 27 years in prison before being released based on new DNA results. A federal court jury rejected his claims and found in favor of the retired police officers. Evans appealed to the Seventh Circuit and lost there too. Evans then filed a petition for rehearing en banc before the Seventh Circuit. That petition has now been denied as well. The retired police officers were represented by Benna Solomon, Myriam Kasper and Jennifer Notz during the appellate proceedings. Andrew M. Hale was lead counsel for the retired police officers at trial in the Northern District of Illinois before the Honorable David Coar. Jon Loevy of Loevy & Loevy represented Evans at trial and on appeal.

Michael Evans Denied A New Trial - Defense Verdict Affirmed

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a verdict in favor of the City of Chicago and ten former Chicago police officers and against Michael Evans, thereby denying Evans a new trial. Evans had filed suit seeking $60 million claiming the officers framed him for the rape and murder of nine-year old Lisa Cabassa in 1976. In August 2006, a jury returned a verdict in favor of the officers and City of Chicago, finding there to be no police misconduct. On appeal, Evans was seeking a new trial. In a 2-1 decision, the Seventh Circuit held that Evans received a fair trial and was not entitled to a new trial. At trial, the police officers were represented by attorneys Andrew Hale, Eileen Rosen, Kevin Horan and John Rock of Rock Fusco, LLC. On appeal, the police officers were represented by Benna Ruth Solomon, Jenny Notz and Myriam Kasper, attorneys with the Corporation Counsel's appellate group. Evans was represented at trial and on appeal by Jon Loevy of Loevy & Loevy.

Seventh Circuit Affirms Sanction Against Frequent Plaintiff Prince Foryoh

In a published opinion in In Re City of Chicago, No. 07-2608,  the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reaffirmed its prior orders sanctioning Prince Foryoh for making false statements on his application for in forma pauperis ("IFP") status. The prior orders barred Foryoh from conducting any federal litigation until all of his outstanding fees and costs, in all of his cases had been paid. The appeal arose after the district courts in Foryoh's pending cases determined that they would allow Foryoh to litigate his pending cases notwithstanding the court's orders. When the defendants objected, the district court judges referred the matter to the Executive Committee, which issued orders stating that barring Foryoh from proceeding would raise due process concerns and prejudice the defendants, since the cases would have to be stayed until Foryoh could pay. On the City's motion, the Seventh Circuit reaffirmed its prior sanctions. The court rejected the view that the sanctions posed any constitutional problem, and described the sanction as "modest." The court emphasized that Foryoh had filed frivolous lawsuits and attempted to defraud both the judiciary and his opponents. The court also rejected the idea that Foryoh's cases would have to be stayed, stating that Foryoh must meet the normal schedule for civil litigation, and that if he fails to do so, his suits must be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court did clarify that once Foryoh pays what he owes, he is entitled to have the order lifted immediately. Avi Kamionski handled the case in the district court and Myriam Kasper handled the appeal.