DOVER, Del. (AP) – A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit filed against a Delaware court official and police officer by a blind man who was wrongfully evicted from his Wilmington apartment with his two daughters.
Chief District Judge Colm Connolly ruled that William Murphy’s claim that authorities violated the Americans with Disabilities Act when evicting him was based on no evidence that he was evicted because of his disability. The court ruled that the application should be dismissed because it had not been provided.
Court of Appeals considers Delaware law banning certain semi-automatic firearms and high-capacity magazines
Connolly also rejected claims that the officers who evicted Murphy in 2021 pursuant to a peace court judge’s warrant violated the constitutional and civil rights of Murphy and his daughters. He said that as court officers acting on an ostensibly valid court order, constables are entitled to “quasi-judicial immunity.” Connolly also waived claims against the JP court system, noting that as a state agency it cannot sue under civil rights law.
“Plaintiffs conclusively state that defendants have a ‘leave first, ask questions later policy,’ but do not allege any facts to support this contention,” Connolly wrote.
A U.S. district judge ruled that a blind person could not prove that his disability was the cause of his eviction.
“On the contrary, the events that allegedly led to and followed the Murphys’ eviction undermine Plaintiffs’ contention that such a policy exists,” he wrote. “The allegations in the amended complaint make clear that what happened to the Murphys was an anomaly resulting from the abuse of the law by private citizens.”
Connolly was referring to the actions of landlord Kenneth Stanford, who had obtained a warrant of possession against a woman who lived in the apartment before the Murphys moved in.
Murphy moved into the apartment in November 2020, one month before a court hearing in Stanford’s lawsuit against the previous tenant, according to court records. Stanford claimed that her previous tenant owed her rent and water bills from April 2020 to mid-December 2020, and testified that she believed the apartment was still under her control. At the same time, however, Stanford University filed a lawsuit claiming that the Murphys had not paid December’s rent.
Despite showing the officer a copy of the lease, Murphy was evicted in February 2021 pursuant to a warrant issued against the previous tenant. They told him he still needed to vacate the building and suggested he file a complaint in JP court for illegal eviction.
At an emergency hearing a week after the eviction, an associate judge asked how Stanford could claim December rent from both Murphy and the previous tenant, even though Stanford denied that Murphy was its tenant. I wondered. The judge concluded that it was “very clear” that Stanford had given false testimony in court and may have committed perjury. According to court records, Stanford refused to answer the judge’s questions and said he wanted to speak to an attorney.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Given that Stanford’s lawsuit against the Murphys had not been scheduled, much less resolved, in February 2020, a magistrate judge ruled that Murphy and his daughters had been wrongfully expelled. He also said that Stanford appears to have “weaponized” a warrant against her former tenant in order to terminate her lease with Murphy. Murphy settled a federal lawsuit against Stanford University in 2021.
Thomas Neuberger, the attorney representing Murphy, said he plans to appeal Connolly’s ruling.
