CA6: City’s order closing hotel ptfs lived in didn’t violate 4A

Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment rights weren’t violated by the city’s order closing the motel they lived in because it was uninhabitable. There was a limited time they were without their personal property, but they were shortly allowed access to retrieve things. Patel v. Glenn, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 30641 (6th Cir. Nov. 3, 2022).*

Under plaintiff’s version of events, the officers violated clearly established law. Under their version they did not. That’s for trial. Pheap v. City of Knoxville, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 30095 (6th Cir. Oct. 27, 2022).*

Plaintiff was PITed by police and crashed into a pole. He can’t show malicious intent just from that. It was reasonable as a matter of law to stop him how they did because he was creating danger. Christiansen v. Eral, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 30116 (8th Cir. Oct. 31, 2022).*

A writ of eviction signed by a clerk after a judgment wasn’t a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Shuler v. Arnott, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200328 (W.D. Mo. Nov. 3, 2022).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.