788 F. Supp. 2d 1261
N.D. Okla.2011Background
- Brown, proceeding pro se, sues MTTA and several MTTA employees alleging §1983 due process and equal protection violations as well as Oklahoma law claims.
- MTTA is a municipal trust operating Tulsa’s public buses; Eppler, Willard, Jane Doe, and Janet Doe are MTTA personnel involved in incidents.
- In April–May 2007 Brown was removed from MTTA buses for intoxication and disruptive conduct, resulting in a 30-day ban and later a permanent ban from MTTA service.
- Brown claimed he was not given written notice or a hearing regarding the ban and that efforts to contest the ban were ignored.
- The Court previously dismissed most claims; now Brown seeks partial summary judgment on due process with MTTA and defendants cross-move for summary judgment on remaining claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brown has a protected property interest in MTTA bus access. | Brown asserts a property interest arises from state law common carrier status and bans without due process. | No protected property interest exists; MTTA may ban in accordance with rules and discretion under the common carrier statute. | No protected property interest; MTTA summary judgment granted. |
| Whether Brown's equal protection claim survives given alleged racial discrimination. | MTTA harassed and banned him due to race; there is a policy or custom of discrimination. | No evidence of disparate treatment or policy; no race-based denial shown. | Equal protection claim dismissed; MTTA granted summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (U.S. 1972) (protected property interest requires a legitimate entitlement)
- Ward v. Housatonic Area Regional Transit Dist., 154 F.Supp.2d 339 (D. Conn. 2001) (no protected property interest in public transportation without state-law entitlements)
- Hennigh v. City of Shawnee, 155 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 1998) (limits on discretion create entitlement to government benefits)
- Ripley v. Wyoming Medical Center, Inc., 559 F.3d 1119 (10th Cir. 2009) (non-discrimination mandate alone does not create property interest)
- Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1983) (due process requires restraint of government discretion where appropriate)