Case: Ingram v. County of Wayne

2:20-cv-10288 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed Date: Feb. 4, 2020

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

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 civil forfeiture practices led to unconstitutional vehicle seizures. They sought declaratory, injunctive,…

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 civil forfeiture practices led to unconstitutional vehicle seizures. They sought declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory relief for violations of the Fourth Amendment, the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment, and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case was originally assigned to Judge Arthur J. Tarnow.

The complaint alleged that Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office's policies created incentives for "the seizure of property without probable cause" and were 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 one 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 sought 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 county moved to dismiss the complaint on March 12, 2020. They argued that the Plaintiff Ingram 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 - because 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 a new plaintiff to the lawsuit and greater detail about Wayne County's alleged unconstitutional processes and their impact on the plaintiffs.

On July 1, 2020, the county filed motions to dismiss for each plaintiff, a motion to abstain claims asserted by Plaintiff Wilson, a motion to abstain or stay claims asserted by Plaintiff Reeve, and a motion for summary judgment on the claims asserted by Plaintiff Ingram. Judge Tarnow issued an opinion on each of these issues on September 30, 2021, allowing the case to proceed on several claims, discussed below. 2021 WL 4479398 

The federal claims that the plaintiffs brought were complicated by contemporaneous state court action. In state court, Plaintiff Wilson’s case proceeded through discovery, and on April 29, 2021, the circuit court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary disposition, meaning she recovered her vehicle. The Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office appealed the decision. Judge Tarnow granted the county’s motion to abstain her federal claim pending results in the state court case for this seizure, but there was another seizure that she contested which did not have a pending state court action that was allowed to proceed.

Plaintiff Ingram stipulated to dismiss the county’s nuisance abatement case which barred her from challenging the seizure related to that case in state court. Her case was allowed to continue because her car was seized on a separate occasion and she did not waive her rights to challenge either seizure in federal court. The county argued that Plaintiff Ingram lacked standing because the seizures were both related to her ex-boyfriend’s activity and, since she was no longer dating him, she did not have a real and immediate threat of future injury. However, the case was allowed to proceed because the plaintiff alleged systemic vehicle forfeiture practices by the county and because two of the three plaintiffs had their vehicles seized twice. The county also argued that the plaintiff waived her rights to pursue a Fourth Amendment claim by settling in state court, but that settlement did not bar a federal claim.

Plaintiff Reeves's due process claim was allowed to proceed based on the county’s failure to provide a prompt post-seizure hearing. The county argued in a motion for reconsideration that the plaintiff had alternate avenues for seeking the return of their vehicle, but the court found these to be unavailable to Plaintiff Reeves because they required the initiation of forfeiture proceedings.

The district court also certified a question regarding Plaintiff Ingram’s due process claims to the Sixth Circuit, which the appellate court accepted for interlocutory appeal, but held in abeyance pending the district court’s ruling on motions for reconsideration filed by the county. All of those motions were denied on June 9, 2022, by District Judge George Caram Steeh, who was assigned this case after the death of Judge Tarnow, largely on grounds that the county was not making any arguments that the court had not already considered. 2022 WL 2079866. 

The Sixth Circuit then lifted the abeyance to consider the issue of whether the county’s custom of delaying forfeiture proceedings and requiring a claimant’s appearance at multiple pre-trial conferences before they have an opportunity to challenge their car’s detention in front of a judicial officer constituted a due process violation under the Fourteenth Amendment. The court sent letters to seek input from the Assistant US Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan and the Attorney General of Michigan. On March 15, 2023, the case was scheduled for oral argument, and on August 31, 2023, the appellate court issued its decision on the due process question.  Applying the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test, the court held that the county was required to provide a timely interim hearing, within two weeks of seizure, to test the probable validity of the seizure.  The court cited the substantial nature of the deprivation, noting that vehicles are often essential to livelihood and that the delay before a forfeiture hearing could be months long, the high risk of erroneous seizure, and the government's apparent and "anything but weighty" interest in seizure in order to obtain proceeds from fees.  Finding that all three considerations favored the plaintiffs, the court next considered the appropriate time between seizure and interim hearing, ultimately determining that two weeks enabled adequate process and accommodated the required scheduling constraints.  Finally, the court made clear that the burden of proof at the hearings would be on the government to show the "probably validity of continued deprivation." It thus affirmed the district court's decision on the Fourteenth Amendment due process claim and remanded for further proceedings. 2023 WL 5622914. 

As of October 2023, this case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Graham Rotenberg (5/31/2020)

Robin Peterson (5/25/2023)

Tessa Bialek (10/2/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16804911/parties/ingram-v-county-of-wayne/


Judge(s)

Stafford, Elizabeth A. (Michigan)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Cavanaugh, Jaimie N (Minnesota)

Hottot, Wesley (Washington)

Morris, Barton W Jr (Michigan)

Attorney for Defendant

Stella, Davidde Alessandro (Michigan)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:20-cv-10288

Docket

May 27, 2020

May 27, 2020

Docket
1

2:20-cv-10288

Class Action Complaint

Feb. 4, 2020

Feb. 4, 2020

Complaint
12

2:20-cv-10288

First Amended Complaint

May 11, 2020

May 11, 2020

Complaint
54

2:20-cv-10288

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motions to Abstain, Stay, Dismiss, and for Summary Judgment [18, 19, 20]; Granting Defendant's Motion to Adjourn [23]; and Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Conduct Discovery [30]

Sept. 30, 2021

Sept. 30, 2021

Order/Opinion

2021 WL 2021

70

2:20-cv-10288

Order Denying Defendant's Motions for Reconsideration (ECF Nos. 55, 56, 57)

June 9, 2022

June 9, 2022

Order/Opinion

2022 WL 2022

74

2:20-cv-10288

Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Aug. 31, 2023

Aug. 31, 2023

Order/Opinion

2023 WL 2023

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16804911/ingram-v-county-of-wayne/

Last updated Feb. 21, 2024, 3:10 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

Civil Case - Complaint

1 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A

View on PACER

3 Exhibit B

View on PACER

4 Exhibit C

View on PACER

Feb. 5, 2020

Feb. 5, 2020

Clearinghouse
3

Notice - Other

Feb. 5, 2020

Feb. 5, 2020

PACER
4

Appearance

Feb. 5, 2020

Feb. 5, 2020

PACER
5

Appearance

Feb. 5, 2020

Feb. 5, 2020

PACER

Notice to Parties of Consent of a Civil Action before a Magistrate Judge Option

Feb. 5, 2020

Feb. 5, 2020

PACER
7

Stipulation and Order

Feb. 27, 2020

Feb. 27, 2020

PACER
8

Dismiss

1 Index of Exhibits List of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 1-11.20.2018

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 2-Misdemeanor Citation

View on PACER

4 Exhibit 3-Docket

View on PACER

5 Exhibit 4-Citation

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 5-2018 Seizure Form

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 6-Excerpt of Policy

View on PACER

8 Exhibit 7-2018 Agreement

View on PACER

9 Exhibit 8-Bankruptcy Docket

View on PACER

10 Exhibit 9-Excerpt of Schedules

View on PACER

11 Exhibit 10-6.17.2019 Report

View on PACER

12 Exhibit 11-2019 Seizure Form

View on PACER

13 Exhibit 12-7.23.2019 Order

View on PACER

14 Exhibit 13-9.18.2019 Order

View on PACER

15 Exhibit 14-Excerpt of Schedules

View on PACER

16 Exhibit 15-Complaint

View on PACER

17 Exhibit 16-Answers

View on PACER

18 Exhibit 17-11.20.2019 Order

View on PACER

19 Exhibit 18-11.27.2019 Motion

View on PACER

20 Exhibit 19-12.20.2019 Order

View on PACER

21 Exhibit 20-1.14.2020 Order

View on PACER

March 12, 2020

March 12, 2020

PACER
9

Stay

1 Exhibit 1 Forfiture Form

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 2 Release Letter

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 3 36th District Court Register of Action

View on PACER

March 12, 2020

March 12, 2020

PACER
10

Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

March 23, 2020

March 23, 2020

PACER

~Util - Terminate Motions

March 23, 2020

March 23, 2020

PACER

Text-Only Order

March 23, 2020

March 23, 2020

PACER
11

Appearance

April 13, 2020

April 13, 2020

PACER
12

Civil Case - Complaint, Amended

1 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

4 Exhibit C

View on RECAP

5 Exhibit D

View on RECAP

6 Exhibit E

View on PACER

7 Exhibit F

View on PACER

8 Exhibit G

View on PACER

May 11, 2020

May 11, 2020

Clearinghouse
13

Response to Motion

May 11, 2020

May 11, 2020

PACER
14

Notice - Other

May 11, 2020

May 11, 2020

PACER
15

Appear*

May 19, 2020

May 19, 2020

PACER
16

Requiring Responsive Pleading* AND Stipulation and Order

May 22, 2020

May 22, 2020

PACER
17

Requiring Responsive Pleading* AND Stipulation and Order

June 18, 2020

June 18, 2020

PACER
18

Motion - Free

1 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 1/17/19 Report

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 1/17/19 Notice

View on PACER

4 Exhibit Declaration of Sinah Hamdan

View on PACER

5 Exhibit 6/24/19 Report

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 6/24/19 Notice

View on PACER

7 Exhibit Complaint in People v. One 2006 Saturn Ion

View on PACER

8 Exhibit Docket in People v. One 2006 Saturn Ion

View on PACER

9 Exhibit Proof of Service of the Complaint

View on PACER

10 Exhibit 10/24/19 Order of the Wayne County Circuit Court

View on PACER

11 Exhibit 1/2/20 Order of the Wayne County Circuit Court

View on PACER

12 Exhibit 1/28/20 Order of the Wayne County Circuit Court

View on PACER

13 Exhibit Motion & Brief for Summary Disposition

View on PACER

14 Exhibit Appearance of Barton Morris

View on PACER

15 Exhibit Motion for Leave to File an Answer

View on PACER

16 Exhibit Proposed Answer

View on PACER

July 1, 2020

July 1, 2020

PACER
19

Motion - Free

1 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 7/26/19 Notice

View on PACER

3 Exhibit Declaration of Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Charles Davis

View on PACER

4 Exhibit Declaration of Cheryl Puckett

View on PACER

5 Exhibit Declaration of Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Dennis Doherty

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 2/5/20 Correspondence

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 36th District Court Docket

View on PACER

July 1, 2020

July 1, 2020

PACER
20

Motion - Free

1 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 11/20/18 Report

View on PACER

3 Exhibit Misdemeanor Citation

View on PACER

4 Exhibit Docket.

View on PACER

5 Exhibit Citation

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 2018 Seizure Form

View on PACER

7 Exhibit Excerpt of Policy

View on PACER

8 Exhibit 2018 Agreement

View on PACER

9 Exhibit Bankruptcy Docket

View on PACER

10 Exhibit Excerpt of Schedules

View on PACER

11 Exhibit 6/17/19 Report

View on PACER

12 Exhibit 2019 Seizure Form

View on PACER

13 Exhibit 7/23/19 Order

View on PACER

14 Exhibit 9/18/19 Order

View on PACER

15 Exhibit Excerpt of Schedules

View on PACER

16 Exhibit Complaint

View on PACER

17 Exhibit Answers

View on PACER

18 Exhibit 11/20/19 Order

View on PACER

19 Exhibit 11/27/19 Motion

View on PACER

20 Exhibit 12/20/19 Order

View on PACER

21 Exhibit 1/14/20 Order

View on PACER

22 Exhibit Bankruptcy - Order For Voluntary Dismissal Of Case

View on PACER

July 1, 2020

July 1, 2020

PACER
21

Certify Class

1 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Exhibit Declaration of Melisa Ingram

View on PACER

3 Exhibit Declaration of Stephanie Wilson

View on PACER

4 Exhibit Declaration of Jaimie Cavanaugh

View on PACER

5 Index of Exhibits

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 1, Docket, People v. 2007 Saturn Outlook

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 2, Wayne Cty Vehicle Seizure Procedures

View on PACER

8 Exhibit 3, Wong deposition

View on PACER

9 Exhibit 4, Leverette deposition

View on PACER

10 Exhibit 5, Mahler deposition

View on PACER

July 13, 2020

July 13, 2020

PACER
22

Requiring Responsive Pleading* AND Stipulation and Order

July 18, 2020

July 18, 2020

PACER
23

Adjourn

July 22, 2020

July 22, 2020

PACER
24

Stipulation and Order

July 24, 2020

July 24, 2020

PACER
25

Response to Motion

1 Exhibit Settlement Proposal

View on PACER

July 29, 2020

July 29, 2020

PACER
26

Requiring Responsive Pleading* AND Stipulation and Order

July 30, 2020

July 30, 2020

PACER
27

Reply to Response to Motion

Aug. 5, 2020

Aug. 5, 2020

PACER
28

Strike

Aug. 5, 2020

Aug. 5, 2020

PACER
29

Response to Motion

Aug. 6, 2020

Aug. 6, 2020

PACER
30

Motion - Free

Aug. 6, 2020

Aug. 6, 2020

PACER
31

Response to Motion

Aug. 12, 2020

Aug. 12, 2020

PACER
32

Reply to Response to Motion

Aug. 19, 2020

Aug. 19, 2020

PACER
33

Response to Motion

Aug. 19, 2020

Aug. 19, 2020

PACER
34

Reply to Response to Motion

Aug. 19, 2020

Aug. 19, 2020

PACER
35

Reply to Response to Motion

Aug. 19, 2020

Aug. 19, 2020

PACER
36

Reply to Response to Motion

Aug. 19, 2020

Aug. 19, 2020

PACER
37

Reply to Response to Motion

Aug. 26, 2020

Aug. 26, 2020

PACER
38

Requiring Responsive Pleading* AND Stipulation and Order

Sept. 4, 2020

Sept. 4, 2020

PACER
39

~Util - Set Deadlines/Hearings AND Stipulation and Order

Sept. 14, 2020

Sept. 14, 2020

PACER
40

Supplemental Brief

1 Exhibit Moody Declaration

View on PACER

Sept. 25, 2020

Sept. 25, 2020

PACER
41

Supplemental Brief

1 Exhibit Nichols v. Wayne Cty Slip Op.

View on PACER

Oct. 2, 2020

Oct. 2, 2020

RECAP
42

Stipulation and Order

Oct. 15, 2020

Oct. 15, 2020

RECAP
43

Hearing on Motion*

Oct. 22, 2020

Oct. 22, 2020

PACER
45

Notice - Other

1 Nichols Order

View on PACER

Nov. 24, 2020

Nov. 24, 2020

PACER
46

Stipulation and Order

Dec. 4, 2020

Dec. 4, 2020

RECAP
47

Notice - Other

Feb. 8, 2021

Feb. 8, 2021

PACER
48

Notice - Other

March 5, 2021

March 5, 2021

PACER
49

Order on Motion to Stay AND Order on Motion to Dismiss

April 1, 2021

April 1, 2021

RECAP
50

Notice - Other

April 29, 2021

April 29, 2021

PACER
51

Response - Free

May 6, 2021

May 6, 2021

PACER
52

Notice - Other

May 13, 2021

May 13, 2021

PACER
53

Response - Free

May 20, 2021

May 20, 2021

RECAP
54

ORDER granting 18 Motion to Abstain on the Claims Asserted by Plaintiff Stephanie Wilson; granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion to Abstain or Stay, or in the Alternative, Motion to Dismiss ; granting in part and denying in part 20 Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment; Adjourning 21 Motion to Certify Class; granting 23 Motion to Adjourn; granting 28 Motion to Strike and denying as moot 30 Motion for Leave to Conduct Discovery. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (MLan)

Sept. 30, 2021

Sept. 30, 2021

Clearinghouse
55

Reconsideration

Oct. 14, 2021

Oct. 14, 2021

PACER
56

Reconsideration

Oct. 14, 2021

Oct. 14, 2021

PACER
57

Reconsideration

Oct. 14, 2021

Oct. 14, 2021

PACER
58

Notice - Other

Jan. 26, 2022

Jan. 26, 2022

PACER

Text-Only Reassignment Pursuant to Administrative Order

Feb. 16, 2022

Feb. 16, 2022

PACER
59

Appear*

Feb. 17, 2022

Feb. 17, 2022

PACER
60

Notice - Other

March 23, 2022

March 23, 2022

PACER
61

Appeal Order/Opinion/Judgment

March 31, 2022

March 31, 2022

PACER
62

Appeal Order/Opinion/Judgment

March 31, 2022

March 31, 2022

PACER
63

Notice of Interlocutory Appeal

April 5, 2022

April 5, 2022

PACER
64

Certificate of Service of Notice of Appeal - 6th Circuit*

April 5, 2022

April 5, 2022

PACER
65

Notice - Other

April 7, 2022

April 7, 2022

PACER
66

Response to Motion

April 14, 2022

April 14, 2022

PACER
67

Reply to Response to Motion

April 28, 2022

April 28, 2022

PACER
68

Reply to Response to Motion

April 28, 2022

April 28, 2022

PACER
69

Reply to Response to Motion

April 28, 2022

April 28, 2022

PACER
70

ORDER Denying Defendant's Motions for Reconsideration (ECF Nos. 55, 56, 57 ). Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (BSau) (Entered: 06/09/2022)

June 9, 2022

June 9, 2022

Clearinghouse
71

NOTICE TO APPEAR BY VIDEO CONFERENCE: Status Conference set for 6/22/2022 at 10:00 AM before District Judge George Caram Steeh. *Parties will be provided Zoom connection information prior to the hearing* (BSau) (Entered: 06/13/2022)

June 13, 2022

June 13, 2022

PACER

TEXT-ONLY NOTICE: Status Conference on 6/22/2022 is Cancelled. (BSau)

June 14, 2022

June 14, 2022

PACER

Text-Only Notice of Hearing Cancelled

June 14, 2022

June 14, 2022

PACER
72

TRANSCRIPT of Motion Hearing held on November 5, 2020. (Court Reporter/Transcriber: Lawrence R. Przybysz) (Number of Pages: 60) (Appeal Purposes) The parties have 21 days to file with the court and Court Reporter/Transcriber a Redaction Request of this transcript. If no request is filed, the transcript may be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 days. Redaction Request due 8/4/2022. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 8/15/2022. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/12/2022. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date, the transcript is publicly available. (Przybysz, L) (Entered: 07/14/2022)

July 14, 2022

July 14, 2022

PACER
73

ORDER from U.S. Court of Appeals - Sixth Circuit re 63 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by County of Wayne [Appeal Case Number 22-1262] (TTho) (Entered: 08/12/2022)

Aug. 12, 2022

Aug. 12, 2022

PACER
74

OPINION and JUDGMENT from U.S. Court of Appeals - Sixth Circuit re 63 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by County of Wayne [Appeal Case Number 22-1262] (DJen) (Entered: 08/31/2023)

Aug. 31, 2023

Aug. 31, 2023

RECAP
75

MANDATE from U.S. Court of Appeals - Sixth Circuit as to 63 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by County of Wayne, 74 Appeal Order/Opinion/Judgment [Appeal Case Number 22-1262] (DJen) (Entered: 11/09/2023)

Nov. 9, 2023

Nov. 9, 2023

PACER
76

ORDER Requiring Response to 21 MOTION to Certify Class or For Leave to Conduct Class Discovery by Melisa Ingram, Stephanie Wilson. Response due by 1/23/2024, Reply due by 2/13/2024. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MLan) (Entered: 12/20/2023)

Dec. 20, 2023

Dec. 20, 2023

PACER
77

ORDER REFERRING OTHER MATTERS to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford: Settlement Conference. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MLan) (Entered: 12/20/2023)

Dec. 20, 2023

Dec. 20, 2023

PACER
78

NOTICE TO APPEAR IN PERSON: Settlement Conference set for 3/5/2024 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford. (Attachments: # 1 Document Continuation) (MarW) (Entered: 01/02/2024)

1 Document Continuation

View on PACER

Jan. 2, 2024

Jan. 2, 2024

PACER
79

NOTICE of Appearance by Nasseem S. Ramin on behalf of County of Wayne. (Ramin, Nasseem) (Entered: 01/03/2024)

Jan. 3, 2024

Jan. 3, 2024

PACER
80

NOTICE of Appearance by Theodore W. Seitz on behalf of County of Wayne. (Seitz, Theodore) (Entered: 01/03/2024)

Jan. 3, 2024

Jan. 3, 2024

PACER
81

NOTICE of Appearance by Sherrie L. Farrell on behalf of County of Wayne. (Farrell, Sherrie) (Entered: 01/04/2024)

Jan. 4, 2024

Jan. 4, 2024

PACER
82

STIPULATED ORDER Setting Answer Date, Class Discovery Period, and Deadline for Class Certification Motion, ( Response due by 2/13/2024 to Amended Complaint 12 ) Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (LSau) (Entered: 01/26/2024)

Jan. 26, 2024

Jan. 26, 2024

PACER
83

Withdrawal of Attorney

Feb. 13, 2024

Feb. 13, 2024

PACER
84

Answer to Amended Complaint

Feb. 13, 2024

Feb. 13, 2024

PACER
86

Stipulation and Order AND Terminate Deadlines and Hearings

Feb. 20, 2024

Feb. 20, 2024

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Michigan

Case Type(s):

Policing

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

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):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Institute for Justice

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):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Due Process: Procedural Due Process

Due Process: Substantive Due Process

Unreasonable search and seizure

Equal Protection

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General:

Forfeiture