CA5: Tax appraiser worked by consent; qualified immunity on scope of search claim

Plaintiff consented to entry onto his property by a tax appraiser, and his dispute was whether the appraiser exceeded the scope of the consent. The district court denied summary judgment for the appraiser, but the Fifth Circuit finds such a dearth of authority on the subject and what there is supports the defendant, so it holds that there must be qualified immunity. King v. Handorf, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8462 (5th Cir. May 6, 2016):

It is uncontroverted that Melba consented to an appraisal. Therefore, as the district determined, Handorf had the consent to take actions consistent with that of a tax appraisal. The principal Fourth Amendment question in this case is whether Handorf exceeded the scope of the consent when conducting the appraisal, and whether those actions constituted an unreasonable search. To resolve this question, we must determine what the scope of permissible action is in a tax appraisal.

There is no guidance within our circuit regarding the actions a tax appraiser may take in an assessment. Further, other than conclusory allegations, the Kings have not identified the proper course of conduct for a tax appraiser. Three cases from our sister circuits, however, support that Handorf’s actions did not constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment.