9th Cir: Due Process "Hassle"

How often do you see a published opinion from a federal court of appeals that uses the word "hassle" to describe needless litigation?  Well, thanks to the irrepressible Chief Judge Kozinski, we now have citeworthy precedent from Clement v. City of Glendale, No. 05-56692 (Mar. 11, 2008):

Officer Young could have avoided years of litigation and needless hassle for himself, the Glendale Police Department, the towing company, the courts, Ms. Clement and her daughter, by simply erring on the side of caution and good public service by letting her know that her vehicle was illegally parked. Instead, the rush to tow led to this protracted litigation that, no doubt, has consumed far more city resources than it would have taken to properly notify Clement.

Slip op. at 2357-58. The case involved how much notice and process was due to the owner of a car before the police towed it away.  The opinion isn't a groundbreaking decision on due process, but it is still a fun read.  Some of the better bits include the opening paragraph, which sums the issue up succinctly:

Virginia Clement lived in a residential hotel and parked her 1981 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz in the hotel’s parking lot.  The car had not been driven in seven years and Clement did not keep the car’s registration current. But she did dutifully complete an alternate form of vehicle registration, she had the hotel’s permission to park there and the car was in its proper space. Without so much as a letter, a knock on the door, a note on her windshield or even a parking ticket, the Glendale police towed and impounded Clement’s car. They left no clue to where it had gone. Only  later did Clement discover that it had been towed for allegedly violating California vehicle registration laws.

Slip op. at 2351.  My favorite: "After discovering what happened to her car, Clement did the American thing: She sued."  Id. at 2352.  The car owner lost, by the way -- both the police officer and the towing company successfully asserted immunity from civil lawsuits, even though Ms. Clement's due process rights were violated.