Ruttenberg v. Jones
| Decision Date | 11 March 2009 |
| Docket Number | No. 1:06cv639.,1:06cv639. |
| Citation | 603 F.Supp.2d 844 |
| Parties | David M. RUTTENBERG, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Frank JONES, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia |
Judith Lynne Wheat, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs.
Anand Vijay Ramana, John David Wilburn, McGuirewoods LLP, McLean, VA, M. Alice Rowan, Prince William, VA, Charles James Swedish, Sloan & Swedish, Vienna, VA, for Defendants.
In this § 19831 suit, plaintiffs, former owners of a Manassas Park, Virginia pool hall, allege that a June 2, 2004, warrantless administrative search of their property violated their Fourth Amendment rights because it was unreasonably conducted. Specifically, plaintiffs allege that the search, which was part of a joint operation with a multi-jurisdictional drug task force seeking to arrest narcotics traffickers who had sold drugs at the pool hall, was unreasonably conducted because the size, scope, duration, and manner of the search unreasonably threatened the pool hall's patrons and employees. Defendants, the City of Manassas Park, its chief of police, two police detectives, a former confidential police informant, and the Manassas Park mayor, move for summary judgment on four grounds. Specifically, defendants argue (i) that certain plaintiffs lack Article III standing to bring their Fourth Amendment claims; (ii) that the warrantless administrative search was constitutionally reasonable in the circumstances; (iii) that even assuming the search was unconstitutional, these defendants cannot be held liable based on direct, bystander, supervisory, or municipal theories of liability; and (iv) that the individual officer defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiffs' asserted constitutional rights were not clearly established at the time of the search. Plaintiffs filed a timely response in opposition, and the matter having been fully briefed and argued, is now ripe for disposition.
For the reasons that follow, defendants are entitled to summary judgment as to plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claims, with plaintiffs' remaining pendent state-law claims to be dismissed without prejudice. Specifically, because the administrative search of plaintiffs' property was reasonably conducted, it did not violate their Fourth Amendment rights. Accordingly, plaintiffs' complaint must be dismissed.
In 1992, plaintiff Triple D Enterprises, Inc. ("Triple D"), a Maryland corporation owned by plaintiffs David Ruttenberg and Judith Ruttenberg, opened the Rack `N' Roll Billiard Club ("RNR"), a pool hall in Manassas Park, Virginia. David Ruttenberg is a 10% owner of Triple D and served as RNR's general manager for all times relevant to this suit.3 His mother, Judith Ruttenberg, is a 90% owner of Triple D and, unlike her son, was never involved in RNR's day-to-day operations.
Defendant City of Manassas Park ("City") is an incorporated Virginia municipality that controls the Manassas Park Police Department ("MPPD"). Since 2002, defendant Chief John Evans ("Chief Evans") has served as the City's chief of police. Both defendant Detective L, an MPPD officer, and defendant Detective W, an officer with the neighboring Prince William County Police Department ("PWCPD"), have served with their respective departments since the late 1980s. At all times relevant to this suit, Detectives L and W were also members of the Narcotics Task Force ("NTF"), a twelve-to-fifteen officer joint task force formed by the MPPD, PWCPD, and Manassas City Police Department ("MCPD") in June 2002 to investigate narcotics distribution in Manassas, Manassas Park, and Prince William County.4 Finally, defendant Thomas Kifer ("Kifer") is a former RNR security officer who worked for the NTF as a confidential informant at various times relevant to this suit, and defendant Frank Jones was elected as the City's Mayor after the June 2, 2004, search of RNR.
The record reflects that RNR, which was located in a Manassas Park shopping center,5 had a maximum legal occupancy of approximately one hundred fifty persons. At all times relevant to this suit, RNR's premises, rectangular in shape, stretched in length from a front shopping center entrance to a rear alley exit. RNR's interior included, inter alia, (i) at least ten standard-size pool tables, (ii) several large video game consoles, (iii) several foosball tables, (iv) at least nine circular tables with accompanying bar stools, (v) a number of large-screen televisions, (vi) a bar extending down approximately half the length of one side of its main room, (vii) an elevated stage for dancing, (viii) a disc-jockey booth, (ix) men's and women's restrooms, and (x) an upstairs office. In 1993, RNR applied for, and received, a Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control ("ABC") license to sell beer to its patrons. David Ruttenberg testified at his deposition in this matter that RNR sometimes remained open twenty-four hours, but typically closed at 2:00 a.m. or 3:00 a.m. on weekdays and circa 5:00 a.m. on weekends. In 2000, in response to a burglary and some domestic disputes that occurred in RNR's parking lot, David Ruttenberg installed a security camera system. Specifically, he installed sixteen cameras in and around RNR, each of which filmed two frames per second. The system's video feed was monitored and recorded in RNR's upstairs office.
Between November 2003 and June 2004, MPPD officers responded to approximately forty-one calls of varying nature in or around RNR, including approximately twelve calls reporting fights or disorderly conduct, ten reporting patrons' excessive intoxication, and two reporting drug distribution activity. Ten arrests resulted, including six occurring inside RNR. The record reflects that RNR was cooperative with law enforcement on each occasion police responded to a call; indeed, the record reflects that at least twelve of the forty-one calls were made by RNR employees.6
In January 2004, the NTF began investigating reports of illegal drug sales in or around RNR. Specifically, the NTF assigned Detective W to conduct undercover surveillance inside RNR, and it assigned Detective L to serve as the case agent supervising Detective W. During a forty-three day span from late February 2004 to early April 2004, Detective W, acting undercover as an RNR patron, purchased or arranged to purchase illegal narcotics in or around RNR on eight occasions. Detective W's notes, included in this record, recount the following attempted or completed drug transactions:
• On February 24, 2004, Detective W negotiated marijuana deals with three different individuals—Jeffrey Price, Eric Golden, and Christopher Price—inside RNR. Thereafter, Detective W received the marijuana for one sale near RNR's restrooms, and he received the marijuana for the other two sales in RNR's parking lot.
• On February 27, 2004, Detective W negotiated and completed a marijuana purchase from Jeffrey Price inside RNR.
• On March 3, 2004, Detective W negotiated a marijuana deal with Jeffrey Price and Andrew Kinsley inside RNR and thereafter received the marijuana in RNR's parking lot.
• On March 10, 2004, Detective W negotiated and paid for a cocaine deal with Jason Brooke inside RNR, but never received the cocaine.
• On March 24, 2004, Detective W negotiated and paid for a marijuana deal with Jeffrey Price inside RNR and thereafter received the marijuana in RNR's parking lot.
• On April 5, 2004, Detective W negotiated and paid for a marijuana deal with Jeffrey Price inside RNR and thereafter received the marijuana in RNR's parking lot.
• On April 8, 2004, Detective W negotiated a marijuana deal over the phone with Jeffrey Price and thereafter received the drugs from Eric Golden in RNR's parking lot.
• On April 19, 2004, Detective W negotiated a marijuana deal with Jeffrey Price and Eric Golden inside RNR, but never completed the transaction.
Detective L testified that he conducted undercover surveillance from an unmarked vehicle during at least seven of the transactions. Additionally, Detective W's notes reflect his belief that Jeffrey Price, who was directly involved in seven of the eight transactions, was an RNR employee7 and that the other narcotics traffickers were RNR patrons.8
In addition to the eight drug transactions, Detective W also observed other ABC violations during the same forty-three day span. Specifically, Detective W's notes indicate that he observed, inter alia, (i) women exposing their breasts on the dance floor on three separate occasions,9 (ii) patrons who claimed to be underage drinking beer on one occasion, (iii) apparently underage patrons served beer without identification checks on four separate occasions, and (iv) patrons immediately outside RNR with open alcoholic beverage containers on one occasion. Detective L testified that he notified the ABC of most, if not all, of these violations.
At some point between April 19, 2004 and June 2, 2004,10 Detectives L and W obtained arrest warrants for Jeffrey Price, Eric Golden, Christopher Price, and Jason Brooke based on those individuals' narcotics trafficking in and around RNR. On or about June 2, 2004, the NTF and the ABC decided to conduct a joint operation (the "Operation") at RNR for the dual purposes of (i) executing the four arrest warrants and arresting Andrew Kinsley based on probable cause and (ii) conducting an administrative ABC inspection.11
At some time prior to 10:00 p.m. on June 2, 2004, the NTF, ABC, and other law enforcement personnel held a pre-Operation briefing at the MCPD. The record reflects that Chief Evans, Detective L, and at least six additional MPPD officers12 were present.13 A PowerPoint presentation was given at the briefing, and the presentation listed the following five...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Abcde Operating, LLC v. City of Detroit
...entry into a pool hall where "[a]pproximately seven of the[ ] twenty-three officers wore black ski masks." Ruttenberg v. Jones, 603 F.Supp.2d 844, 854 (E.D. Va. 2009).d. Forcible EntryAs its final challenge to the manner in which the Defendant officers entered its club, Plaintiff contends t......
-
Sutherlin v. Smith
...'generally represent only another way of pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent.'" Ruttenberg v. Jones, 603 F. Supp. 2d 844, 872 (E.D. Va. 2009) (quoting Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 165 (1985)), aff'd, 375 F. App'x 298 (4th Cir. 2010).The government entit......
-
Torres v. Horne
...Pa. 1996) (plaintiff lacked standing to challenge property forfeiture because earlier had denied ownership); Ruttenberg v. Jones, 603 F. Supp. 2d 844, 861 (E.D. Va. 2009) (owner present during warrantless administrative search of pool hall had standing, while owner absent from premises lack......
-
Koumalatsos v. Town of Holly Ridge
...rights absent a showing that he had anindependent privacy interest in the goods seized or the area searched."); Ruttenberg v. Jones, 603 F. Supp. 2d 844, 860-61 (E.D. Va. 2009) (holding that a shareholder of a corporation, who was not present during search of the corporation, lacked standin......