Partial Settlement in Philadelphia ‘Robo-Forfeiture’ Class Action

Last week, a partial settlement agreement was announced in the class action lawsuit alleging that the City of Pennsylvania’s law enforcement branch has been falsely seizing property from its residents using the city’s civil forfeiture mechanism and violating residents’ constitutional property rights.

The plaintiffs alleged in their class action lawsuit against the city that law enforcement initiates the city’s civil forfeiture mechanism to take their homes after family members are accused of crimes. The plaintiffs also allege that the district attorney’s office retains the proceeds of the sale or use of the property for its own use.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno announced that he would schedule a hearing soon to preliminarily approve a classwide settlement. Under the terms of the settlement, the city and district attorney’s office would be required to change policies allowing law enforcement to seize property they believe is involved in criminal activity.

According to the class action lawsuit filed in August of last year, law enforcement used a city policy called the forfeiture mechanism to seize property they think may have been involved in a crime, a procedure the plaintiffs call “robo-forfeiture.” The complaint also alleged that the district attorney’s office filed civil actions to seize properties without providing notice to owners, who did not have any involvement in or knowledge of any crime. The plaintiffs accused the city of taking more than 1,000 homes, 3,200 vehicles and $44 million in cash from 2002 to 2012 under “robo-forfeiture” procedures.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement filed with Philadelphia federal court last week, the first two claims would be removed if the court approves the deal. The city and law enforcement would limit use of “robo-forfeiture” procedures to a set of specific circumstances, including persistent illegal activity and inadequacy of less restrictive measures, according to the class action settlement deal.

Additionally, claims that the district attorney’s office coerced property owners to sign away constitutional rights to get their property back would be settled, according to the deal. According to an attorney for the plaintiffs, “The DA’s office has agreed to stop imposing those kinds of unconstitutional conditions in the future and to let everyone know that if anyone is currently under those conditions that they are void going forward.”

Claims that remain in the class action lawsuit include allegations related to in-court processing of forfeiture proceedings as well as how properties are retained and disbursed by the city.

Plaintiffs are represented by William H. Mellor, Scott G. Bullock, Darpana M. Sheth and Robert P. Frommer of Institute for Justice, and David Rudovsky of Kairys Rudovsky Messing & Feinberg LLP.

The City of Philadelphia “Robo-Forfeiture” Class Action Lawsuit is Christos Sourovelis, et al. v. City of Philadelphia, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-04687, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.