RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0194p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ ALISON PATRICIA TAYLOR, │ Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, │ > Nos. 20-1538/1588 │ v. │ │ CITY OF SAGINAW, MICHIGAN; TABITHA HOSKINS, │ Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants. │ │ ┘ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Bay City. No. 1:17-cv-11067—Thomas L. Ludington, District Judge. Argued: July 29, 2021 Decided and Filed: August 25, 2021 Before: GRIFFIN, LARSEN, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges. _________________ COUNSEL ARGUED: Philip L. Ellison, OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL PLC, Hemlock, Michigan, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Kailen C. Piper, O’NEILL, WALLACE & DOYLE P.C., Saginaw, Michigan, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant. ON BRIEF: Philip L. Ellison, OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL PLC, Hemlock, Michigan, Matthew E. Gronda, St. Charles, Michigan, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Kailen C. Piper, O’NEILL, WALLACE & DOYLE P.C., Saginaw, Michigan, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant. Daniel T. Woislaw, PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION, Sacramento, California, for Amicus Curiae. Nos. 20-1538/1588 Taylor v. City of Saginaw, Mich. et al. Page 2 _________________ OPINION _________________ GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge. The City of Saginaw routinely chalked car tires to enforce its parking regulations. In our prior opinion, we held that doing so is a search for Fourth Amendment purposes, and that “based on the pleadings stage of this litigation, . . . two exceptions to the warrant requirement—the ‘community caretaking’ exception, and the motor-vehicle exception—do not apply here.” Taylor v. City of Saginaw, 922 F.3d 328, 336 (6th Cir. 2019) (Taylor I). However, we left for another day whether the search could be justified by “some other exception” to the warrant requirement. Id. We consider one of those other exceptions today—specifically, whether suspicionless tire chalking constitutes a valid administrative search. Because we conclude that it does not, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the City. But because we conclude that the alleged unconstitutionality of suspicionless tire chalking was not clearly established, the City’s parking officer, defendant Tabitha Hoskins, is entitled to qualified immunity. We therefore affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion I. Plaintiff Alison Taylor received several parking tickets from defendant City of Saginaw for leaving her car in its downtown area beyond the time allowed by city ordinance. Each time, defendant Tabitha Hoskins chalked the tire of Taylor’s vehicle several hours before issuing the ticket. Every ticket noted the time Taylor’s vehicle was first “marked” with chalk in the regulated area. Hoskins also documented the ticket with one or more photographs of the offending vehicle. Taylor filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the City and Hoskins as a putative class action, alleging that the tire chalking violated her Fourth Amendment rights as construed by Nos. 20-1538/1588 Taylor v. City of Saginaw, Mich. et al. Page 3 United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012). At the motion-to-dismiss phase, the district court held that tire chalking fell within the automobile and/or community caretaking exceptions and therefore did not violate the Fourth Amendment. …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals