No abuse of discretion in introduction of videotape at summary judgement stage where the tape substantially varied from the tape alleged in the complaint, so long as the relevant portions are the same. No abuse of discretion in ruling on the motion even if the tape is ultimately inadmissable, as the person alleged to have seen the tape was available to testify.
Complaint and ambiguous videotape enough to defeat S1983 false arrest claim.
No curtilage rights in gated path to condo, as it is a shared area.
When resident told police officer to wait at the door and turned and walked down the hall and the police officer followed her, the police entry into the house was consensual, absent her protest.
No error in award of costs.
|Timothy Harney v. City of Chicago|