The city of Los Angeles does not have to compensate the owner of a North Hollywood print shop destroyed when SWAT officers stormed in two years ago seeking a fugitive — punching holes in the walls and ceiling, and firing tear gas inside that damaged printing machines and supplies beyond repair — a federal judge ruled Monday, March 25.
U.S. District Court Judge John F. Walter found the 2022 LAPD raid at NoHo Printing & Graphics on Lankershim Boulevard “constituted a valid use of police power” not covered under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which in part holds that the government cannot take private property for public use without just compensation.
“Because no taking occurred, ‘as unfair as it seems,’” Walter wrote, quoting a similar case out of Michigan, “Defendant has no responsibility to compensate Plaintiff.”
In his ruling, Walter found that governments are allowed to seize property when they’re doing so as part of criminal investigations, as opposed to when they take property using their civil powers under eminent domain.
Attorneys for Pena, who for a time was operating out of his garage as he attempted to rebuild his business, said he would appeal the decision.
“We’ll keep going as long as we have to, even if that means we have to petition the Supreme Court for a review,” said Jeffrey Redfern, one of Pena’s attorneys who works for the Institute of Justice, a national non-profit law firm.
The Aug. 4, 2022 raid started at around 4:20 p.m. that day, when a man fleeing U.S. marshals barged into the print shop and attacked the owner, Carlos Pena, forcing him outside.
The marshals called for backup from LAPD SWAT, whose officers attempted to contact the man for up to two hours. When the man did not respond, the officers began firing tear gas canisters into the shop and into the crawl space linking several units in the building.
After the officers entered the crawl space themselves, using a camera for tight spots they couldn’t access, they realized the man was not there.
At around 2:30 a.m., Pena, who had run his business for 31 years, including 13 years at the Lankershim location, was allowed back inside. The damage to his business was devastating.
The tear gas contaminated everything inside, including electronics, banners and clothing, forcing clean-up crews to throw away all of Pena’s equipment he’d built up over decades.
Pena’s losses were not covered by insurance. While he had previously switched to a cheaper service, Pena’s legal team found most insurance agencies do not cover destruction of property by police, Redfern said.
“We have clients in Colorado — their entire house was destroyed” in a similar police operation, Redfern said. “They didn’t have coverage. Typically the language of most policies state they do not cover damage ‘by order of governmental authority.’ Most people have no idea what that means.”
Related Articles
Judge issues gag order in Trump’s hush-money trial
Injured motorcyclist wins $11 million in lawsuit against DWP
Sold a home recently? Here’s what you’ll get from the $418 million Realtor settlement
As more states target disavowed ‘excited delirium’ diagnosis, police groups push back
No crime wave caused by new ‘zero-bail,’ LA court official says, but advocates say rules not evenly applied
