Arrington v. City of Fort Wayne, 1:16-cv-00148

Eddie J. Arrington (pro se) sued the City of Fort Wayne, Mayor Henry, John Caywood, Kelley Towing, and Lunz Excavating after city code officials (with court authorization) removed vehicles and other items from his residential properties for municipal code violations and a prior court injunction.
The City’s Neighborhood Code Enforcement (NCE) had repeatedly investigated Arrington’s properties since 2009, issued Orders to Abate, and obtained a permanent injunction in December 2013 requiring removal of inoperable vehicles, indoor furniture stored outside, dilapidated outdoor items, and similar nuisances.
After Arrington failed to comply, the state court authorized the City to enter and remove noncompliant items; on March 10, 2014 the City contracted Kelley (towing) and Lunz (removal) to remove specified items.
Arrington filed this suit in state court (March 10, 2016) alleging racial discrimination, Due Process and Equal Protection violations under § 1983 and state-law theft; the case was removed to federal court.
Defendants moved for summary judgment, pointing to the administrative and judicial process that preceded the removal and to evidence showing the City enforces ordinances without regard to race; Arrington’s pro se summary response contained no evidentiary citations.
The district court granted summary judgment for all defendants on federal claims (dismissed with prejudice) and remanded the remaining state-law theft claim to state court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Due Process was violated by seizure/removal of property	Arrington contends property was taken unlawfully without adequate process	City and officers show administrative notices, Orders to Abate, right to a hearing, state-court injunction, and court authorization to enter and remove items	No due process violation; federal claim dismissed
Whether enforcement was racially discriminatory (Equal Protection)	Arrington alleges selective enforcement against him because of race, citing photos of other allegedly nonenforced properties	Defendants produced records showing enforcement actions at the cited properties and evidence that race is not considered in enforcement	No evidence of purposeful racial discrimination; equal protection claim dismissed
Whether private contractors (Kelley, Lunz) are liable under § 1983	Arrington contends Kelley and Lunz participated in wrongful takings	Defendants show they acted under City direction and pursuant to court order; no evidence of conspiracy or state action by contractors	Contractors not liable under § 1983; summary judgment for Kelley and Lunz
Whether federal court should retain supplemental state-law theft claim	Plaintiff pleaded state theft claims arising from alleged wrongful removal	Defendants did not press Rooker–Feldman but federal claims were resolved on the merits	Federal claims dismissed with prejudice; court remanded state-law theft claim to state court

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
Ogden v. Atterholt, 606 F.3d 355 (view evidence in nonmovant’s favor at summary judgment)
Fitzgerald v. Santoro, 707 F.3d 725 (no inference from mere speculation)
Massey v. Johnson, 457 F.3d 711 (nonmoving party must establish essential elements)
Reynolds v. Jamison, 488 F.3d 756 (elements of a § 1983 claim)
Xiong v. Wagner, 700 F.3d 282 (purposeful discrimination required for equal protection)
Brokaw v. Mercer Cnty., 235 F.3d 1000 (private actors liable under § 1983 only when conspiring with state actors)
Rekhi v. Wildwood Indus., 61 F.3d 1313 (collateral estoppel is an affirmative defense)
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus., 544 U.S. 280 (Rooker–Feldman doctrine described)
Doe-2 v. McLean Cnty. Unit Dist. No. 5 Bd. of Dirs., 593 F.3d 507 (declining supplemental jurisdiction after federal claims dismissed)