Background
Tire Town Auto LLC operated towing services in Wood County, Wisconsin, and was listed on the county’s rotating dispatch list for years. After complaints regarding safety violations and overcharging, the county removed the company from the list. Tire Town sued under Section nineteen eighty-three of Title forty-two of the United States Code, alleging a violation of procedural due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court dismissed the case, ruling that the company failed to plausibly allege a protected property interest in a spot on the list.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the case de novo, accepting all factual allegations as true but not legal conclusions. To state a procedural due process claim, a plaintiff must first allege a constitutionally protected property interest. The court explained that a property interest requires more than an abstract desire or unilateral expectation; it must be a legitimate claim of entitlement derived from an independent source such as state law, a contract, or a mutually explicit understanding. The court found that no Wisconsin statute, regulation, or ordinance guaranteed a spot on the towing list. The county’s Minimum Standards policy expressly stated it did not constitute a contract and reserved the right to withdraw any participant at any time for any appropriate reason. This broad discretion meant the benefit was not a protected entitlement. The court distinguished public employment cases, noting that the policy’s removal standard was looser than the good cause standard required for a property interest in a job. The court also rejected the argument that the policy had the force of law, finding the cited precedent inapplicable. Because Tire Town failed to allege a property interest, the court did not reach other arguments.
To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it. He must, instead, have a legitimate claim of entitlement to it.
Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 (1972)
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that participation in government benefit programs, such as a towing rotation list, does not create a protected property interest unless specific laws, contracts, or mutual understandings limit government discretion to remove participants.