Legal Opinion · Dissent

Redwood v. Lierman

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 7, 2002No. 4-01-0612Published

1DissentJustice Cook

I respectfully dissent and would affirm the decision of the trial court. Plaintiffs were not denied due process under the fourteenth amendment: they were given notice and a hearing before their business van was declared “inoperable.” Nor were plaintiffs denied any rights under the fourth amendment. The majority ignores the cases holding that a warrant is unnecessary when a municipality seizes property that has been declared to be a nuisance, relying instead on the much-criticized Conner case. Finally, “qualified immunity” protects government officials where plaintiffs are not able to show the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Davis v. SchererSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Zane Brent Edgington v. Missouri Department of Corrections Mel Carnahan Robert Schoenen Donna Schriro Cranston Mitchell Julie IvesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
  3. Flatford v. City of MonroeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
  4. Charles Freeman and Rosalyn Brown, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants v. City of Dallas, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
  5. Robert Hroch v. City of Omaha, a Municipal Corporation Anderson Excavating and Wrecking Company, a Nebraska CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API