X hits on this document

PDF document

No. 2—09—0833 Opinion iled March 31, 2011 - page 16 / 24

64 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

16 / 24

No. 2—09—0833

3—707(a) (West 2008)), and the absence of insurance was established at the scene by defendant’s

failure to show an insurance card (see 625 ILCS 5/3—707(b) (West 2008)).

The Duguay court explained, “we do not see what purpose denying possession of the car to

a passenger, a girlfriend, or a family member could possibly serve.” Duguay, 93 F.3d at 353. In

contrast, Hucker did not deny possession of the vehicle to the teenage passenger or anyone else

because no one at the scene asked for it. Moreover, the purpose of impounding the car in this case

was clear: preventing an uninsured vehicle from being operated in violation of the Vehicle Code.

3. Harrington

Defendant next argues that this case is similar to Harrington v. Heavey, No. 04—C—5991,

2006 WL 3359388 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 16, 2006) (not reported in F. Supp. 2d). Harrington filed a civil

rights action against various police of icers, alleging that the impoundment of her car violated her

fourth and fourteenth amendment rights. Based on a minor traf ic violation, Officer Heaveystopped

a vehicle driven by Harrington’s son, who was driving with an expired license. Harrington, 2006 WL

3359388, at *1. The officer issued citations for speeding and driving without a valid license. The

of icer seized the car pursuant to a city ordinance that mandated the seizure of vehicles driven by

persons not possessing valid licenses. A ter being stopped, the driver called Harrington, who arrived

at the scene. Harrington showed the officer her valid license and proof of liability insurance, and she

asked for the car. The of icer refused and impounded the vehicle. Later that evening, Harrington

regained custody of the car after paying the city’s $500 administrative seizure fee and towing charges.

Harrington, 2006 WL 3359388, at *1. Seeking damages, Harrington’s complaint alleged that the

impoundment was unreasonable under the fourth amendment and that the seizure ordinance’s lack

  • -

    16-

Document info
Document views64
Page views64
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 09:04:39 UTC 2016
Pages24
Paragraphs591
Words7652

Comments