A recent legal filing alleges that a local resident was wrongfully arrested and detained by a police officer, raising questions about constitutional rights and police conduct. The complaint was filed by Miguel Burgos in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on March 11, 2026, naming Officer Yi #18009 and the City of Chicago as defendants.
According to the complaint, Burgos claims he was walking on September 13, 2025, near 4031 West Armitage Avenue in Chicago when he was observed by Officer Yi. The filing states that Officer Yi was stationed at 4000 West Armitage at the time and had previously interacted with Burgos. During their encounter, words were exchanged between the two parties.
The lawsuit asserts that Burgos never made any threatening statements or gestures toward Officer Yi during this exchange. Specifically, it is alleged that “Plaintiff never stated to Defendant OFFICER YI #18009 that ‘I got something for you’ while gesturing a potential weapon with his hand in his pocket.” Despite this claim, Burgos alleges that Officer Yi reported to other officers that such an aggravated assault had occurred.
The complaint further notes that although Officer Yi was equipped with a functioning body camera during the incident, none of the verbal exchange between him and Burgos was recorded until additional officers arrived on scene. Burgos contends there were no credible facts supporting probable cause for his arrest or detention.
Burgos brings multiple counts against both Officer Yi individually and the City of Chicago as his employer. Under Count I (42 U.S.C. §1983 False Arrest), he alleges violations of his civil rights under federal law due to wrongful arrest and imprisonment for crimes he did not commit. The complaint states: “Asa direct and proximate consequence of said conduct of Defendant OFFICER YI #18009, the Plaintiff… suffered violations of his constitutional rights.” He also claims emotional distress as a result.
Count II accuses Officer Yi of illegal detention without probable cause under federal law (referencing Manuel v. City of Joliet), while Counts III and IV allege false arrest and false imprisonment under Illinois state law against both Officer Yi and the City of Chicago through its agents. In these counts, Burgos describes suffering “emotional anxiety, fear, emotional distress, monetary loss, pain and suffering” as direct consequences of the alleged actions.
The lawsuit includes a claim based on respondent superior liability (Count V), asserting that because Officer Yi acted within the scope of his employment as an agent of the City of Chicago during these events, the city is responsible for any torts committed by its employee under state law.
Finally, Count VI seeks indemnification from the City of Chicago should any judgment be entered against Officer Yi for actions taken within his official capacity. The filing notes: “If Defendant OFFICER YI #18009 is found liable, his respective employer will be liable to indemnify him for any compensating damages and attorney fees and costs under § 1988.”
Throughout all counts, Burgos requests judgment in his favor along with fair and reasonable compensatory damages, punitive damages where applicable, attorneys’ fees, costs associated with litigation, and other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case identifies Gregory E. Kulis & Associates Ltd., including attorney Gregory E. Kulis (6180966) at 134 N. LaSalle St., Suite 444 in Chicago as representing Miguel Burgos. Brian Orozco is also listed among counsel for the plaintiff. The case number is 1:26-cv-02723.
Source: 126cv02723_Miguel_Burgos_v_Officer_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf
