18-866-cv (L); 18-490-cv Nnebe v. Daus; Stallworth v. Joshi UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2018 (Argued: January 14, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019) Docket Nos. 18-866-cv (L); 18-1254-cv (XAP); 18-490-cv JONATHAN NNEBE, KHAIRUL AMIN, EDUARDO AVENAUT, NEW YORK TAXI WORKERS ALLIANCE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs - Appellants - Cross-Appellees, ALEXANDER KARMANSKY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, — v. — MATTHEW DAUS, JOSEPH ECKSTEIN, ELIZABETH BONINA, THE NEW YORK CITY TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, CHARLES FRASER, Defendants - Appellees - Cross-Appellants, CHARLES FRAZIER, Defendant.* * The Clerk of Court is requested to amend the caption to conform to the above. ANTHONY STALLWORTH, PARICHAY BARMAN, NOOR TANI, THE NEW YORK TAXI WORKERS ALLIANCE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. MEERA JOSHI, CHRIS WILSON, STAS SKARBO, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants - Appellees. B e f o r e: KATZMANN, Chief Judge, and HALL and LYNCH, Circuit Judges. The Nnebe plaintiffs are taxi drivers who instituted this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, complaining that their constitutional rights were violated when their licenses were suspended following their arrests and they were not given meaningful post-suspension hearings to consider whether their licenses should be reinstated. They appeal following a bench trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Richard J. Sullivan, Judge), after which the court held that the hearings provided by defendants were sufficient. Because the drivers’ property interest in their licenses is substantial, the risk of erroneous deprivation is unacceptably high, and defendants could institute a more meaningful process at minimal financial and administrative cost, we conclude that the hearings did not afford plaintiffs adequate process. We therefore AFFIRM in part and REVERSE in part the judgment of the district court and REMAND for further proceedings. The Stallworth plaintiffs are also taxi drivers who instituted a similar action challenging the same regulatory regime. The district court dismissed their complaint for failure to state a claim in reliance on its Nnebe ruling. Because we find that that ruling was incorrect, we AFFIRM in part and REVERSE in part the judgment of the district court and REMAND for further proceedings. 2 DANIEL L. ACKMAN, Law Office of Daniel L. Ackman, New York, New York, DAVID T. GOLDBERG, Donahue & Goldberg, LLP, New York, New York, for Plaintiffs - Appellants - Cross- Appellees in Nnebe, and Daniel L. Ackman, Law Office Of Daniel L. Ackman, New York, New York for Plaintiffs - Appellants in Stallworth. CLAUDE S. PLATTON, Assistant Corporation Counsel (Richard Dearing, Susan Paulson, on the brief), for Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, New York, for Defendants - Appellees - Cross-Appellants in Nnebe, and Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, Claude S. Patton, Susan Paulson, and Scott Shorr, New York, New York, for Defendants - Appellees in Stallworth. Runa Rajagopal, The Bronx Defenders, Bronx, New York, for ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals