A group of motorists earlier this month filed a federal class action lawsuit against Florida’s toll road system for detaining motorists who attempt to pay the tolls with cash. About 600 miles worth of toll roads and bridges are under the jurisdiction of The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), which hands operational duties over to the private firm Faneuil, Inc., which is responsible for the toll collectors. The complaint charges both firms with false imprisonment and other civil rights violations.
“For approximately four years, FDOT and Faneuil have engaged in a practice of detaining motorists and their passengers on the Turnpike System until such motorists provided certain personal information in exchange for their release,” attorney James C. Valenti wrote on behalf of the plaintiffs. “The motorists and passengers have been detained without their consent and without legal justification.”
Arizona is home to the oldest continuously operating speed camera programs and the US headquarters for the two largest private companies that operate the equipment. It could also be the latest state to join the fifteen jurisdictions that ban automated ticketing machines. The Arizona Senate Government Reform Committee voted 5 to 1 on Wednesday to approve legislation repealing the statutes that have allowed the use of red light cameras and speed cameras in the state. The move represents a significant reversal for a legislature that in the previous session introduced no significant legislation to curtail photo enforcement thanks to a leadership that fully backed the program.
Sixty-four dealerships that were terminated during Chrysler’s 2009 bankruptcy reorganization sued the U.S. Treasury Department today, seeking at least $130 million.
The suit, filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims here, alleges the government violated the Constitution by taking the stores’ franchises and their state legal rights without adequate compensation.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that more dealers could come on board, as the 64 suing dealers represent only eight percent of Chrysler’s cull. Neither Treasury nor Chrysler (which is not named in the suit) have commented. The suit, which can be read in its entirety in PDF format here, claims violation of Fifth Amendment rights, arguing that:
[the dealer cull] served the public purpose of promoting stability to the financial system of the United States… This is a loss that should not, however, be borne by a few individual dealers but, by reason of its broad and salutary public purpose, must in fairness and justice be borne by the public as a whole.
Automotive News [sub] reports that Global Vehicles, a firm with a contract to distribute Mahindra pickup trucks in the US, has dropped its lawsuit in US court in an apparent attempt to rescue its distribution deal. The contract between Mahindra and GV called for British arbitration of disputes, and apparently the British arbitration panel required that all claims be handled through it rather than in US courts. The dropped suit would have required Mahindra to press forward with its US launch regardless of pending arbitration. Mahindra, meanwhile, has said it is looking outside of its deal with GV for a US distributor, so it’s not clear if GV’s olive branch will even make a difference.
Traffic camera vendor American Traffic Solutions showed no municipal love as it filed a breach of contract suit against Baytown, Texas on Monday. The St. Valentine’s Day complaint accused the city of failing to approve the mailing of an expected number of red light camera citations generated by the company.
Baltimore’s WBAL TV reports that some 2,000 red light camera citations were “verified” by a police officer who died months ago. Baltimore police say only external copies of citations bear the signature of the deceased officer, and that internal versions of the citations bear the signature of officers who were alive when they signed them. Still, it’s not clear how the deceased officer’s signature appeared on the copies of the citations that were sent out… and given someoftheshenanigans that have surrounded the red light camera industry, I’m sure some will speculate that a conspiracy is afoot. Especially with camera proliferation on the march in Baltimore County. [WBAL won’t allow embedding of its videos, but you can find the report on Youtube]
The Virginia House of Delegates and a state Senate committee approved legislation that would make a rolling right-hand turn on a red light a reckless driving offense. On Thursday the Senate Transportation Committee unanimously approved a bill introduced by Delegate Bill Janis (R-Glen Allen) which the lower chamber had approved by a 67 to 31 margin on February 4.
“Any person who drives a motor vehicle in violation of Section 46.2-833 is guilty of reckless driving,” House Bill 1993 states.
The owner of a family van was surprised to receive a ticket in the mail from police in the southern Italian town of Oria accusing him of driving 1230 km/h (764 MPH). The Lizzanello resident had been driving his Fiat Doblo on the SS7 in the province of Brindisi on November 6 and weeks later received a letter demanding that he pay 165 euros (US $223).
Italian tickets allow a five percent tolerance to account for the possibility of error. At 1230 km/h, the motorist exceeded the 90 km/h (56 MPH) speed limit with an adjusted velocity of 1078 km/h (669 MPH), according to the notice signed by two officers (view ticket). Oria police insist that the camera managed by the private firm Sodi Scientifica SpA is perfectly accurate. Officials blamed the incident “clerical error” in a statement issued Thursday.
Via the excellent lawbloggers at The Volokh Conspiracy comes news of a decision by a California appellate court in re: State vs Xinos which finds that the data recorded by a vehicle’s Event Data Recorder or “black box” is protected by the fourth amendment. The ruling covered a case in which police used EDR data to charge the driver in a fatal crash of vehicular manslaughter, and under appeal, the ruling was handed down that
We do not accept the Attorney General’s argument that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the data contained in his vehicle’s SDM. The precision data recorded by the SDM was generated by his own vehicle for its systems operations. While a person’s driving on public roads is observable, that highly precise, digital data is not being exposed to public view or being conveyed to anyone else. . . . We conclude that a motorist’s subjective and reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to her or his own vehicle encompasses the digital data held in the vehicle’s SDM.
And, according to Volokh
the computer data is in the car, not outside the car, so the legal standard that governs access to the data probable cause but not a warrant
Given trends towards ever more storage of vehicle telemetry data, this is a heartening development for motorists and privacy activists… but don’t be surprised if the issue ends up in the Supreme Court. [Hat Tip: TTAC commenter fincar]
The South Dakota House of Representatives voted 43 to 24 on Tuesday to prohibit the use of red light cameras and speed cameras in the state. A bipartisan group of lawmakers led by state Representative Peggy Gibson (D-Huron) took aim at the controversial automated ticketing machine set up in Sioux Falls, describing the due process denied innocent motorists ticketed by the system.
“My constituent not only did not own the car that was photographed, but she was not even in Sioux Falls at the time,” Gibson said Tuesday. “In other words, she was presumed guilty of a traffic violation she did not commit in a car she did not own, but she had to go to great lengths to prove her innocence.”
The Eleventh Circuit US Court of Appeals on Tuesday saw no problem with jailing a man for eight hours after he blew .03 on a breathalyzer — far below the legal limit. Santa Rosa County, Florida sheriff’s deputies had arrested Roger A. Festa on the charge of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) on April 9, 2005. Since he had been entirely sober, Festa sued Deputy Adam Teichner and Deputy Douglas Burgett for unlawful arrest.
A century ago, the forerunners of the American Automobile Association (AAA) provided a service that warned motorists about upcoming speed traps. AAA Carolinas turned away from this history and used its considerable influence on Monday to support a speed trap declared illegal by South Carolina’s attorney general and several of its lawmakers. Since August, the tiny town of Ridgeland has allowed a private company to operate a speed camera on Interstate 95 in direct defiance of a state law enacted in June specifically to stop the program (view law).
“All branches of government are facing constricting budgets,” a AAA Carolinas statement explained. “Law enforcement agencies will not be able to simply add staff to handle the growing traffic volume and therefore must look to creative solutions to do more with less. This photo-radar enforcement program in the Town of Ridgeland is one such example and should be replicated as opposed to rejected.”
Anonymous informants may direct police to pull over any motorist regardless of whether the other driver has committed any traffic offenses under a ruling handed down by the Michigan Court of Appeals last week. The state’s second highest court reversed the finding of a circuit court that had insisted on police officers having probable cause before initiating a traffic stop.
The court considered a March 17, 2008 incident in which Michigan State Trooper Christopher Bommarito was on patrol in the city of Southgate. As Bommarito was heading out of a parking lot, a woman behind the wheel of a red pickup truck pointed at a nearby car and mouthed the phrase “almost hit me.” Bommarito immediately activated his siren and entered into hot pursuit. He had no other information aside from the point when he pulled over Shaun David Barbarich who was later arrested for drunk driving.
I just replaced the engine in my 2005 Porsche 911 due to the failure of the INTERMEDIATE SHAFT. I would like to know just how widespread the problem is with 911’s and other Porsche models too. Why?
I am considering filing a lawsuit against Porsche to recover the costs associated with replacing the engine. If you have had an INTERMEDIATE SHAFT failure and have an interest in joining in my lawsuit or simply sharing your experience please contact me: westsidetravelmedicineATgmail.com
The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled on January 24 that officers who received speed camera tickets while driving police cars on duty must pay the $40 fine. Montgomery County Officers Dean Cates, Randy Kucsan, Bill Tran, and Dana Way protested after their department reissued citations in their names in 2008. They were found guilty in district court, but a circuit court judge dismissed the charges on the grounds that the officers were denied their due process rights. The state appealed, hoping the court would rule that police officers are not entitled to due process before liability for a speed camera ticket is transferred.
Under county policy, speed camera tickets are re-issued to the policemen, paramedics and firemen who were behind the wheel of police cars, ambulances and fire trucks if the emergency lights on the vehicles were not visibly activated in the photograph. The officers complained that their sergeant would ask them weeks or months after an alleged offense to explain why they were speeding. (Read More…)
Recent Comments