PHILADELPHIA – A panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has thrown out the appeal of a constitutional rights violation case brought against the Philadelphia Parking Authority by a man whose car was booted for supposedly unpaid parking tickets.
A Dec. 18 per curiam opinion from the Third Circuit dismissed the appeal of Zhaojin David Ke, on the basis that his action was ill-supported and meritless.
“In March 2019, Ke filed a complaint against the Philadelphia Parking Authority (PPA) and its Executive Director, Scott Petri. In the complaint, which he twice amended, Ke alleged that the defendants booted his car because of his failure to pay three parking tickets that, according to Ke, he never received,” the Third Circuit panel stated.
“Ke further alleged that when he called the PPA to come remove the boot, an employee arrived at the scene and told him that he must pay $547 to have the boot removed. Ke stated that he requested a hearing to contest the tickets, but the driver told him that ‘it was too late for that.’ Ke paid the fee.”
Ke later went to a PPA office to inquire into the parking tickets, where an employee there provided him with a printout of the three tickets and, according to Ke, told him that they “must have been sent to the wrong address.”
Based on these allegations, Ke claimed that the defendants violated: (1) His 14th Amendment right to procedural due process by failing to provide sufficient pre-immobilization notice of the parking tickets; (2) His 8th Amendment right to be free of excessive fines by imposing $547 worth of fines and fees, and several state-law claims.
The defendants moved to dismiss the second amended complaint on the grounds that Ke failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The District Court agreed, granted the motion and dismissed the second amended complaint.
Ke moved the District Court to reconsider its decision, but the District Court denied his request and Ke appealed to the Third Circuit.
The federal appellate court agreed with the District Court’s disposition of this case and need not repeat its reasoning here, believing it correctly concluded that Ke failed to state a due process claim because he received all the notice and process he was due.
Since Ke received a notice on his windshield with a number to call for information about the boot, he had the opportunity to contest the fine and underlying tickets in a post-deprivation hearing – but he chose not to.
“The District Court also correctly concluded that Ke failed to state an Eighth Amendment violation because he did not allege facts that would show that the disputed fines and fees were grossly disproportional to the gravity of his parking offenses,” the Third Circuit said.
“Lastly, given the District Court’s dismissal of Ke’s federal claims, the District Court acted within its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims. We have considered Ke’s arguments on appeal and conclude that they are meritless. Accordingly, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.”
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit case 20-2131
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:19-cv-01001
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com