Judge Arthur Spatt
Powell’s home fell into disrepair, and was eventually demolished, on June 17, 2011, after village officials deemed it unsafe, required it to be boarded up, and arranged for sewer disconnection—all allegedly without proper notice. On the day of its demolition, a police sergeant ordered Powell’s removal from the home after she was found in the home in violation of a “No-Occupancy” order. Powell’s vehicle was damaged—and “totalled”—when the village impounding it. A June 18 demolition permit, sought the day after the home’s actual demolition, was approved on June 23. Powell never sought compensation through state remedies. In her lawsuit under 42 USC §§1983 and 1988 the court partly dismissed, among others, Powell’s “takings claims” seeking damages for the losses of her vehicle and the value of her real property. Such claims were not “ripe” because Powell did not avail herself of New York’s procedures for obtaining compensation. However the court found Powell’s allegations adequately pleaded that defendants emergency actions were arbitrary, thus withstanding a defense grounded on Parratt v. Taylor, which provided an emergency based exception to the requirement that notice and predeprivation process be provided.
