E.D.Cal.: Excessive damage in executing writ of possession can state claim

Excessive damage in executing a writ of possession can state a Fourth Amendment claim. Dayton v. Fairfield Mobile Home, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41228 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2026).

Vehicle finance company’s Fourth Amendment claim against the village’s retention of inoperable seized vehicles is dismissed in part. Unneeded property usually is returned to the owners. Santander Consumer USA, Inc. v. Vill. of Freeport, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41282 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026).*

Painfully tight handcuffs isn’t shown by clearly established law to be excessive force where the plaintiff threatened the officer. Ennes v. Presque Isle Cty., 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 5954 (6th Cir. Feb. 27, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Community caretaking function, Qualified immunity, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Warrant execution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.