West v. Duncan, No. 5:01-CV-1168.
| Decision Date | 14 December 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 5:01-CV-1168. |
| Citation | 179 F.Supp.2d 794 |
| Parties | Sathena A. WEST, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Margaret L. DUNCAN, Mayor, City of Aurora, Ohio, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio |
Robert O. Garnett, Shaker Heights, OH, for Plaintiffs.
David M. Benjamin, Law Office of David M. Benjamin, Aurora, Frederick P. Vergon, Jr., Smith, Marshall, Weaver & Vergon, Cleveland, OH, for Defendants.
On October 23, 2001, Defendants City of Aurora Mayor Margaret L. Duncan, Police Chief Gerald Dietrich, Sergeant Scott Garan, Patrolman Robert Hagquist, and Patrolman Michael Wadlington moved for summary judgment [Docs. 60-61]. Plaintiffs Sathena West, Ciera West, and Tyerell West oppose the motions. Because the Court holds that the plaintiffs have failed to show a constitutional violation and that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, the Court grants the defendants' motions for summary judgment.
In this case, the plaintiffs claim that several City of Aurora police officers violated their civil rights during a traffic stop. The plaintiffs say Garan had no probable cause to stop their car. Further, the plaintiffs say the police had no justification to search their vehicle, to search Sathena West, or to prevent Sathena West from comforting her children during the traffic stop. The plaintiffs also say the City of Aurora has an unwritten policy to harass and dissuade African-Americans from coming within its boundaries.
The defendants deny they violated any of the plaintiffs' constitutional rights during the traffic stop. The defendants also say they are immune from liability in the circumstances of this case.
The traffic stop at issue took place shortly after 4:15 p.m. on February 3, 2001. The stop occurred some time after the plaintiffs left the Aurora Farms Premium Outlets shopping district.
At the time of the stop, the plaintiffs occupied a vehicle owned by Sathena West. Five people occupied the vehicle. A boyfriend, Pierre Jackson, operated the car. In addition to Sathena West and Pierre Jackson, Sathena West's sister was in the car. Two young children of Sathena West also occupied the car.
Because Sathena West failed to appear for a noticed deposition, her evidence is found only in the affidavit she attaches to her memorandum opposing summary judgment.
Shortly before being stopped, the car driven by Pierre Jackson left the Aurora Farms Premium Outlets shopping district with some purchases. As they left the store, Sathena West says a police car watched them load their vehicle. Sathena West says this police car then followed them as Jackson drove their vehicle out of the parking lot. The police car pulled the plaintiffs over shortly after leaving the parking lot.
Sergeant Garan initially stopped the plaintiffs' car. Sathena West claims Garan did not immediately respond to her question about the reason for the stop. Instead, Sathena West says Garan went to the front of the vehicle. According to Sathena West, Garan told her he stopped the car because it did not have a front license plate only after viewing the front of the car. In fact, the plaintiffs' car had front license plate. However, Sathena West says Garan was behind their vehicle and was never able to observe the front of the car until he made the traffic stop.
Because Jackson had an outstanding felony arrest warrant and Sathena West's driver's license was suspended, the police towed the plaintiffs' vehicle. Before towing the vehicle, the officers conducted a search.
As to the search, Sathena West says the police officer asked them to exit the vehicle. She says three police cruisers were present. Once they exited, a police officer began searching the front compartment of the vehicle. Sathena West says a female police officer told her the search was for drugs, stolen property, or weapons. Sathena West also says a male and female police officer searched her. The female officer then searched her purse. In the course of searching the vehicle's trunk, the police found new clothes on hangers. Sathena West says she produced the receipt for the clothes when the police requested it. Sathena West's new clothes were placed in a police cruiser. The police transported Sathena West to the police station in one cruiser and her sister and sons in another cruiser. Once at the station, the police car with Sathena West's clothes drove off on another call. Sathena West says she was rebuffed when she asked about her clothes. After twenty-five minutes, the police cruiser with her clothes returned. Sathena West says the officer brought the clothes into the police station and threw them on the floor.
During the search of the car, Ciera West and Sathena West's sons were placed in the rear of a police cruiser. Sathena West says the police prevented her from comforting her sons when they became distressed.
The defendants' version of events differs. On the date in question, Sergeant Garan says he pulled into the parking lot of the Aurora Farms shopping area when he noticed a 1990 Toyota without a front license plate leaving the lot. He turned around in the parking lot and followed the car, pulling it over shortly thereafter. Before Garan stopped the vehicle, a LEADS computer search showed the vehicle owner's driver's license was suspended. Sathena West was listed as the owner of the car.
Jackson was driving the plaintiffs' car. Garan approached the car and asked Jackson for his driver's license. Jackson did not provide a driver's license but gave Garan his name and social security number. Garan discovered through the LEADS computer that Jackson had an outstanding felony warrant for his arrest. Garan decided to tow the car because Sathena West had a suspended license and no other licensed driver was available to move the car.
Garan says he then searched the car pursuant to the City of Aurora police department's policy of conducting inventory searches before towing vehicles. During the search, he found new clothing on hangers in the trunk of the car. After asking Sathena West if the clothes were stolen, Garan contacted the Oshkosh store and confirmed Sathena West purchased the clothes.
After Garan decided to tow the vehicle, he asked Sathena West if she wanted a ride to the police station. Garan says she accepted the ride and consented to a search of her purse so she would be permitted in the police cruiser. The dispatcher directed Patrolman Hagquist to the scene to take Sathena West to the police station.
Before Garan stopped the plaintiffs' vehicle, Patrolmen Wadlington says he was in the Aurora Farm Premium Outlets parking lot investigating two African-American suspects for writing bad checks. He observed an African-American man and woman in a vehicle, who he later learned were Sathena West and Pierre Jackson, but determined they were not his suspects. Wadlington says he ran the license plate of the vehicle because the car did not have a front license plate. Wadlington did not follow the plaintiffs' car when it left the shopping district. However, he received a call to back up Garan at a traffic stop. When Wadlington arrived, he found Garan talking to Jackson.
As Garan began searching the plaintiffs' vehicle, Wadlington placed Sathena West's sons and Ciera West in the back of his car where it was "warm and safe." He says the children were in his car for no more than ten minutes before he transported them to the police station.
On May 14, 2001, the plaintiffs filed their lawsuit against Garan, Wadlington, Hagquist, Duncan, and Dietrich. They sue under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging various underlying constitutional violations. Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that Garan, Wadlington, and Hagquist stopped their car without probable cause, conducted an unreasonable search of the vehicle and persons, and detained them without cause in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The plaintiffs also allege the traffic stop interfered with their freedom to travel freely throughout Ohio in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Finally, Sathena West says the City of Aurora has an unofficial policy of harassing African-Americans in its jurisdiction and that Garan subjected her to the traffic stop because of her race, in violation of her equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.1
Beyond their federal claims, the plaintiffs assert several claims under Ohio law. These claims include false arrest, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and a "constitutional tort."
The defendants now seek summary judgment on all the plaintiffs' claims. They challenge whether the plaintiffs have offered sufficient evidence to support their constitutional claims. They also claim immunity under federal and state law.
The Court considers the defendants' motions below.
Summary judgment is appropriate where the evidence submitted shows "that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). The moving party has the initial burden of showing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact as to an essential element of the non-moving party's case. Waters v. City of Morristown, Tenn., 242 F.3d 353, 358 (6th Cir.2001). A fact is material if its resolution will affect the outcome of the lawsuit. Daughenbaugh v. City of Tiffin, Ohio, 150 F.3d 594, 597 (6th Cir.1998) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986)).
Once the moving party satisfies its burden, the burden shifts to the non-moving party to set forth specific facts showing a triable issue. Matsushita Elec. Indus. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Hare
...state regulation, and it does not give defendants the right to ignore Nebraska's traffic laws at their discretion. West v. Duncan, 179 F.Supp.2d 794, 803 n. 5 (N.D.Ohio 2001); U.S. ex rel. Verdone v. Circuit Court for Taylor County, 851 F.Supp. 345, 350 It is important to note at the outset......
-
State v. Noel
...inventory search, even if not thorough and complete, satisfies the Fourth Amendment if administered in good faith."); West v. Duncan, 179 F.Supp.2d 794, 803 (N.D.Ohio 2001) ("[P]olice may search a vehicle properly impounded or towed in order to establish the contents of the car."); United S......
-
Gaddis ex rel. Gaddis v. Redford Tp.
...that the officers put forth. (Pl. Br. at 37.) Thus has Plaintiff put forth a claim of selective enforcement. See West v. Duncan, 179 F.Supp.2d 794, 806 (N.D.Ohio 2001). Plaintiff has failed, however, to adduce evidence that any Defendant did not enforce the law in a similar manner against s......
-
U.S. v. Coplin, 05-2077.
...the owner and operator of the Honda were one and the same. This assumption has grounding in the case law, see, e.g., West v. Duncan, 179 F.Supp.2d 794, 803 (N.D.Ohio 2001); Commonwealth v. Deramo, 436 Mass. 40, 43, 762 N.E.2d 815, 818 (2002), and we therefore do not question 5. The Supreme ......