Embassy Realty Investments, Inc. v. City of Cleveland
572 F. App'x 339
6th Cir.2014Background
- Plaintiffs allege City of Cleveland violated substantive due process, Fourth Amendment, and took property without just compensation when it demolished their commercial building at 3902 Lee Road.
- Embassy Realty owned the property; Barnes previously owned it and transferred to Embassy in 2008; Captain Buffalo intended to open a coffee house there.
- An original 1998 condemnation/violation notice was issued before 1998; later notices and multiple administrative proceedings occurred from 2007–2009.
- City proceeded with demolition in 2009 after nuisance findings, despite ongoing permit appeals and reviews; demolition occurred following a local board decision and emergency ruling.
- District court granted summary judgment for the City; on appeal, the Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding demolition lawful under police power and that Fourth Amendment entry was reasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Substantive due process viability of demolition | Embassy/Barnes claim demolition based on outdated 1998 notice violated due process | City acted within police power to abate a nuisance; not arbitrary or shocks the conscience | Summary judgment proper; no due process violation |
| Takings claim viability | Demolition moot by pending appeals; homeowners unable to undo condemnation | Police power to abate nuisance permits demolition without compensation | Not a taking; police power valid defense; summary judgment affirmed |
| Fourth Amendment warrant requirement for demolition entry | Entry to demolish without warrant violated Fourth Amendment | Entry after nuisance finding and hearings is reasonable; emergency proceeding justified | Warrantless entry reasonable; no Fourth Amendment violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Davet v. City of Cleveland, 456 F.3d 549 (6th Cir. 2006) (police power to abate nuisance; not taking when properly authorized)
- Pritz v. Messer, 149 N.E.2d 30 (Ohio 1925) (police power authority to demolish nuisance; public health/safety)
- Englewood v. Turner, 858 N.E.2d 431 (Ohio App. 2006) (due process review of nuisance abatement procedures)
- Englewood v. Turner, 897 N.E.2d 213 (Ohio App. 2008) ( Turner's second appeal; administrative remedies and judicial review)
- Freeman v. City of Dallas, 242 F.3d 642 (5th Cir. 2001) (warrantless demolition of nuisance may be constitutional post-remedial orders)
- Hroch v. City of Omaha, 4 F.3d 693 (8th Cir. 1993) (condemnation actions and remedies do not automatically violate Fourth Amendment)
- Ryan v. State of Tennessee, 257 F.2d 63 (6th Cir. 1958) (constitutional questions not decided hypothetically)
- Davet v. City of Cleveland, 456 F.3d 549 (6th Cir. 2006) (reiterated police power/notice safety doctrine)
- Pearson v. City of Grand Blanc, 961 F.2d 1211 (6th Cir. 1992) (substantive due process standard for arbitrary government action)
- Sigley v. City of Parma Heights, 437 F.3d 527 (6th Cir. 2006) (substantive due process and nuisance abatement guidance)
- Harris v. City of Akron, 20 F.3d 1396 (6th Cir. 1993) (substantive due process/official action not shocks the conscience)