.
Feedback

Dearborn Resident Suing City Over 2008 Arrest

The civil rights complaint filed Wednesday is requesting $250,000 in physical and property damages.

A Dearborn resident is suing the city and in U.S. Federal District Court over what she claims was a wrongful arrest in 2008.

According to legal documents released Friday by Dearborn lawyer Scott Murdoch, his client Christine Schmidt is asking for $250,000 in physical and property damages for an incident she said led to stress and anguish so bad they required hospitalization, as well as the loss of her residence.

The lawsuit filed Feb. 8 explains that Schmidt was arrested at 1:30 a.m. on March 15, 2008, for trespassing at her rented home on Mead Street. The call to police was made by her landlord, Nabil Hawily, who was denied entry into the home when he came there asking Schmidt to pay her rent.

Schmidt was taken to jail and released after posting a $500 bond.

Murdoch alleges that he then provided proof to the city that Schmidt legally resided at the home for more than five months, including copies of rent payment, paid utility bills, and a copy of her driver's license showing her address as the home at 5287 Mead.

"The city continued to prosecute her for trespass,” Murdoch said in a statement. “Due to the stress of the prosecution and threat of going to jail, my client was hospitalized.”

The case was taken to the and dismissed in April of 2009 by Judge Richard Wygonik.

“I think that the owner of the residence used the Police to help collect rent for him," Judge Wygonik said at the hearing, according to documents provided by Murdoch. ”How can there be an illegal entry if the person has the right to be there? It appears that the evidence says she had a right to be there.”

Though the case was thrown out, Murdoch explains that the lawsuit centers on a civil rights complaint that the city of Dearborn, police department, city prosecutor, individual officers and the landlord should be held liable for civil rights violations to include wrongful arrest and imprisonment, malicious prosecution, gross negligence, and abuse of process, amongst other claims.

Ahmed February 13, 2012 at 03:35 pm
Unacceptable practices by the officer who should be help personally liable.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Dearborn Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Carla O'Neill June 19, 2013 at 03:39 pm
Wasn't a major portion of the deficit a result of the failure of students to repay $$$millions inRead More student loans? There is a rumor that HFCC wants to forgive those loans and pass on the debt to Dearborn taxpayers. Was there due diligence regarding the awarding of these loans?
Tom B June 18, 2013 at 07:42 pm
Way too much for a college having financial problems.
Daniel Lai (Editor) June 12, 2013 at 03:09 pm
Here is a copy of the terms of service. http://dearborn.patch.com/terms We will not tolerateRead More readers posting with curse words or attacking other readers. Thank you for your comments. Have a nice week. If you require further clarification, you are welcome to email me.
Gary Woronchak June 12, 2013 at 10:32 am
Hasn't even worked one day? Not one day in 15 years? Really? Not even credit for one day? When IRead More worked at the Press & Guide (which eliminated my position in a budget restructuring that has continued under various corporate owners at the P&G for a decade and a half, resulting in them moving their offices to Southgate and more recently just out-and-out eliminating their editor, sports editor and photographer) we had a policy of no anonymous letters to the editor. This was done because, while everyone has the right to express their opinion, putting a real name with an opinion meant people displayed more decorum and, well, less cowardice than is allowed in online comments from the shadows. Joseph, the benefit of post-employment health care after just eight years of service may have, in the early 1990s, been more acceptable in some way I can't figure (retention of key department heads has been cited as a reason, as was that it apparently mirrored a benefit for state officials), but it clearly was part of the excesses of Wayne County that was unjustifiable and unsustainable in the 2000s. This practice was ended two years ago by a resolution I introduced.
Daniel Lai (Editor) June 12, 2013 at 11:22 am
The original comment has been deleted because it violates our terms of service.
Joseph Borrajo June 13, 2013 at 10:08 am
Thank you Gary Woroncahk for the response.
laplateau June 11, 2013 at 11:28 am
Yeah, unless the drinking trough is filled with taxpayer water.