Filed Date: Feb. 4, 2020
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
On February 4, 2020, three Michigan residents whose vehicles were seized and impounded by police filed this putative class action lawsuit against Wayne County in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs, represented by the public interest organization Institute for Justice and private counsel, sued under 42 U.S.C. §1983; they contended that Wayne County's vehicle seizure policies and practices are unconstitutional. They sought declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory relief for violations of the 4th Amendment, the excessive fines clause of the 8th Amendment, and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The complaint alleged that Wayne County's policies create incentives for "the seizure of property without probable cause" and are designed to "maximize revenue" rather than fight crime. Wayne County allegedly seized and impounded cars "based simply on their proximity to crimes" committed by someone other than the driver. Once confiscated, plaintiffs were allegedly forced to pay "arbitrary fees" or go through a lengthy nuisance-abatement proceeding without the opportunity to assert an "innocent owners" defense.
For the named plaintiff, her car was allegedly impounded because her boyfriend was suspected of engaging in prostitution-related activities. She alleged that her car was impounded twice merely because it was in proximity to prostitution and drug-related activities, and that she was ultimately forced to pay a flat redemption fee to reclaim her vehicle, without an opportunity to assert that she was not present or involved in the alleged activity that prompted the seizure. This process ultimately forced her to file for bankruptcy and lose her car.
The plaintiffs seek to certify a class of "persons who own a vehicle (or other property within a vehicle) that has been or will be seized by Defendant Wayne County on or after February 5, 2018 and before the date of class
certification, whether pursuant to Michigan’s Controlled Substances Act (MCL 333.7521, et seq.), the Public Nuisances chapter of the Revised Judicature Act of 1961 (MCL 600.3801, et seq.), or the so-called Omnibus Forfeiture Act (MCL 600.4701, et seq.)," as well as a subclass of individuals who had their vehicles so seized when they were not present or present but not suspected of any wrongdoing.
The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on March 12, 2020. They argued that the named plaintiff lacked standing and suffered no constitutional violation because she waived any challenge to the seizure of her property. Further, they contended that there was probable cause - the car was suspected of being connected to prostitution-related activities - to seize her vehicle, and that therefore she had no legal claim.
On May 1, 2020, the plaintiffs amended their complaint to specify that the police did not have probable cause to suspect any prostitution-related activities. Additionally, the amended complaint added an new plaintiff to the lawsuit and greater detail about Wayne County's alleged unconstitutional processes and their impact on the defendants.
As of May 31, 2020, the case is ongoing with Judge Arthur J. Tarnow presiding.
Summary Authors
Graham Rotenberg (5/31/2020)
For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16804911/parties/ingram-v-county-of-wayne/
Stafford, Elizabeth A. (Michigan)
Tarnow, Arthur J. (Michigan)
Cavanaugh, Jaimie N (Minnesota)
Hottot, Wesley (Washington)
Morris, Barton W Jr (Michigan)
West, Kirby Thomas (Virginia)
Stella, Davidde Alessandro (Michigan)
Stafford, Elizabeth A. (Michigan)
Tarnow, Arthur J. (Michigan)
Cavanaugh, Jaimie N (Minnesota)
Hottot, Wesley (Washington)
Morris, Barton W Jr (Michigan)
West, Kirby Thomas (Virginia)
Stella, Davidde Alessandro (Michigan)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16804911/ingram-v-county-of-wayne/
Last updated Jan. 19, 2023, 3:21 a.m.
State / Territory: Michigan
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Feb. 4, 2020
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Three Detroit residents who had their cars seized and impounded by Wayne County.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Pending
Defendants
County of Wayne (Wayne), County
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Due Process: Substantive Due Process
Unreasonable search and seizure
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General: