899 F. Supp. 2d 391
W.D. Pa.2012Background
- Snyder, pro se, sues North Huntingdon Police Department officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for events surrounding her eviction from Augusta Circle, North Huntingdon, PA.
- Snyder lived at Augusta Circle with her two children and mother; she was not a leaseholder and the lease was signed by her sister, McCarl, with occupancy limits.
- A protection from abuse order against Snyder’s mother led to her removal from the home and intensified efforts by landlord Scalise and McCarl to remove Snyder.
- On June 29–30, 2011, police entered the residence with Scalise and informed Snyder she must leave; Snyder alleges the entry occurred without her consent.
- ADA Powanda advised officers that Snyder was a trespasser with no right to tenancy; over two days, events escalated into a private eviction, with belongings moved and Scalise regaining control of the property.
- Snyder filed suit on July 5, 2011; defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings; the court granted in part and denied in part, including dismissal of E.S. claims and a qualified immunity ruling on several counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Snyder can pursue claims on behalf of her minor son given pro se status | Snyder asserts claims on behalf of E.S. | Pro se status prevents representation of a child | E.S. claims dismissed without prejudice. |
| Whether the officers are entitled to qualified immunity for alleged Fourth Amendment entries/searches | Officers violated Fourth Amendment rights | Qualified immunity shields if rights not clearly established | Counts IV–V denied without prejudice; qualified immunity issues unresolved on record. |
| Whether Snyder’s Fourteenth Amendment due process claim (Count II) survives | Due process rights were violated by self-help eviction | No protected property interest or hearing requirement clearly established | Count II granted as to qualified immunity; plaintiff’s due process claim limited by possessory interest analysis. |
| Whether Snyder’s Fourth Amendment seizure of the premises and personal property (Counts I, III, VI) survives | Police involvement caused a seizure/interference with property and possessions | Actions reasonable given lack of tenancy and advisory advice | Count I granted; Counts III and VI denied without prejudice; related issues await development. |
Key Cases Cited
- Osei-Afriyie v. Med. Coll. of Pa., 937 F.2d 876 (3d Cir.1991) (pro se plaintiff cannot represent child in federal court; remedies include appointment or dismissal without prejudice)
- Abbott v. Latshaw, 164 F.3d 141 (3d Cir.1998) (possessory/ownership disputes and evictions analyzed for property rights under due process)
- Soldal v. Cook Cnty., 506 U.S. 56 (Sup. Ct. 1992) (unreasonable seizure concept includes interference with possessory interests)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (qualified immunity analysis flexible; order of steps not fixed)
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980) (probable cause and reasonableness in arrests; threshold standards for seizures)