Background
Owners of a motel in South Central Los Angeles sued the City of Los Angeles after the city declared the property a public nuisance hub for prostitution and criminal activity and revoked its use permit. The plaintiffs raised constitutional challenges and a state law writ of mandate claim following the district court’s dismissal of their complaint.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the dismissal de novo and found the plaintiffs failed to plead a Monell claim because they did not identify official municipal policy causing constitutional harm. The Fifth Amendment takings claim failed as the city acted in response to criminal activity and public nuisance. The Fourteenth Amendment due process claim failed because the redactions did not unduly prejudice the case and the plaintiffs received notice and a hearing. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the state law claim due to lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that property owners must specifically allege official municipal policy to succeed on civil rights claims and confirms that nuisance abatement actions generally do not constitute takings.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download