United States Eighth Circuit

In an action against the City of Omaha and its Planning Department Code Inspector, asserting federal constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 and an inverse condemnation claim under state law, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the practical effect of plaintiff's argument -- that neither the County nor the City had jurisdiction to take action against a serious health and safety hazard on his property -- was contrary to manifest legislative intent; 2) the alleged littering was prohibited by the city ordinance at issue long prior to its occurrence; 3) if action taken pursuant to the ordinance violated Fourth Amendment warrant requirements, the resulting criminal prosecution may be tainted, but that does not render the authorizing statute unconstitutional; and 4) an inspector who was lawfully on the premises and who saw an apparent public health and safety violation from the exterior of a detached structure did not need a warrant before looking in the window to confirm or refute the apparent violation.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/17/2010
• Published 05/17/2010

Judges

• LOKEN, Chief Judge., Before LOKEN, Chief Judge,GRUENDER and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• W. Patrick, argued, Omaha, NE, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Alan M. Thelen, argued, Omaha, NE, for Appellee.