Theophilos Deligiannis v. City of Anaheim

MEMORANDUM

Theo Deligiannis appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging that defendants violated various constitutional rights in connection with the towing of his vehicle. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Stoot v. City of Everett, 582 F.3d 910, 918 (9th Cir.2009). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Deligiannis’s Fourth Amendment and procedural due process claims on the basis of qualified immunity because, at the time of the incident, it was not clearly established whether Deligiannis was entitled to a warrant or a pre-seizure hearing before defendants seized his vehicle under California statute for failure to pay multiple parking tickets. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243-44 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009); cf. Clement v. City of Glendale, 518 F.3d 1090, 1096 (9th Cir.2008) (officers entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time of the incident whether pre-towing notice must be given before a car with a valid planned non-operation certificate may be removed from a parking lot matching the owner’s address);…