6 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"Property" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Zilly stays a portion of the Korean restaurant's case accusing the city of not answering the restaurant's calls for help for the Capital Hill Occupying Protest's foreseeable issues involving property damage, loss of business revenue and violent crime. The restaurant's claims for substantive due process, taking and negligence are dismissed with prejudice. The remainder of the case is stayed pending a ruling by the Washington Supreme Court in "Campeau v. Yakima HMA LLC."
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv540, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, property, due Process
J. Rice finds in favor of the city against the minerals company's claim that the former violated the latter's right to due process when it authorized activities to surface owners on the land where the company owns mineral interests. The company does not present sufficient evidence to establish its per se physical taking claim, because the individual landowners and the city made surface-level improvements to the land, which is not the same as running underground interferences.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Washington, Judge: Rice, Filed On: September 19, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv5055, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, property, due Process
J. Zilly dismisses the Korean restaurant's claims for violation of its substantive due process rights in its lawsuit alleging that the city did not answer the Korean restaurant's calls for help for the Capital Hill Occupying Protest's foreseeable issues involving property damage, loss of business revenue and violent crime. The Korean restaurant alleges that the city created a generalized danger for everyone in the protest area and the Capitol Hill neighborhood, but this argument fails because the city's response to the protest was not directed toward the Korean restaurant.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv540, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, property, due Process
J. Ho finds the district court improperly dismissed the property owner’s civil rights claims as to takings and due process regarding work done by the city, which damaged the property and caused adjacent properties to flood. The owners allege that city officials violated their rights at the direction of Houston’s mayor and city council, which is enough to establish liability. State law claims were properly dismissed as barred by sovereign immunity. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Ho, Filed On: August 21, 2023, Case #: 22-20019, Categories: civil Rights, property, due Process
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Oberto recommends denying, in part, a county, sheriff and deputy’s motion for summary judgment on a property owner’s trespass and due process claims. There are triable issues of fact regarding whether a deputy violated the owner's due process rights when he demanded access to his property through a locked gate without a warrant.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Oberto, Filed On: June 20, 2023, Case #: 1:17cv1260, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, property, due Process