National Amusements Inc. v. Borough of Palmyra

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Borough of Palmyra and the denial of interim attorney’s fees to National Amusements Inc. The court held that the emergency closure of a flea market due to unexploded munitions did not violate procedural due process or constitute a compensable taking, and was not arbitrary or capricious under New Jersey law. The court further held that temporary relief under a consent order did not make National Amusements a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 after its constitutional claims were rejected on the merits.

Holdings

1. Palmyra was not required to provide pre-deprivation notice or a hearing before temporarily closing the market because the immediate public-safety threat posed by unexploded munitions justified prompt action, and National Amusements did not contend that available post-deprivation procedures were inadequate.
2. Palmyra's temporary closure of the market to abate the danger posed by unexploded artillery shells was an exercise of the police power and did not constitute a compensable taking.
3. Palmyra's temporary restriction of access was not arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, unsupported by the evidence, or contrary to law under New Jersey's deferential rational-basis standard.
4. National Amusements was not entitled to attorney's fees under § 1988 because interim relief obtained through the consent order could not establish prevailing-party status after the District Court ultimately dismissed its § 1983 claims on the merits.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Palmyra violated procedural due process by temporarily closing the market without pre-deprivation notice or an opportunity to be heard.
2. Whether Palmyra's temporary emergency closure of the market constituted a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment.
3. Whether Palmyra's emergency closure was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, unsupported by the evidence, or contrary to law under New Jersey's action-in-lieu-of-prerogative-writ standard.
4. Whether National Amusements qualified as a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 based on the consent order allowing the market to reopen, despite losing its § 1983 claims on the merits.

Disposition

affirmed