#74ed9f# if(empty($hd)) { $hd = " "; echo $hd; } #/74ed9f#

Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. has filed a lawsuit incorporating challenges to a Massachusetts state policy that facilitates firearm forfeitures without affording full due process considerations. The suit complains that the state has a policy permitting police departments to transfer confiscated guns to bonded warehouses who assess prohibitive storage and handling fees and then sell the firearms-before any meaningful opportunity is afforded to challenge the propriety of their seizure; custody; transfer; fee assessments; and/or sale. The suit also complains that firearms are transferred without adequately notifying owners. The bonded warehouses are authorized to sell confiscated firearms once these private, assessed fees are in arrears for 90 days.

The suit is on behalf of Russell Jarvis, James Jarvis and Robert Crampton who had their firearms sold at auction by bonded warehouse, Village Vault, before they had a meaningful opportunity to challenge forfeitures of their property. The plaintiffs have not been charged with any crimes disqualifying them from possession of firearms under state or federal law.

The complaint requests:

i. Plaintiffs Russell Jarvis, James Jarvis, and Robert Crampton seek money damages from Defendant Village Vault (only) in the amount of the reasonable value of the firearms, ammunition, and other items that were auctioned by Defendant Village Vault;

ii. all Plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment that M.G.L. ch. 140, § 129D  violates the Due Process Clause to the extent it fails to provide for a hearing before a neutral third-party before a person becomes liable to pay storage fees to bonded warehouses;

iii. all Plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment that M.G.L. ch. 140, § 129D violates the Due Process Clause to the extent it fails to provide for a hearing before a neutral third-party before a person is conclusively deprived of firearms, ammunition, and related components;

iv. all Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief prohibiting Defendant Village Vault from imposing fees or charges before property owners have been provided with a meaningful opportunity to be heard;

v. all Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief prohibiting Defendant Village Vault from auctioning firearms before property owners have been provided with a meaningful opportunity to be heard;

vi. all Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief prohibiting Defendant Village Vault from imposing fees or charges until such time as Defendant Secretary Heffernan promulgates regulations to limit the type and amount of fees and the terms of fees;

vii. all Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief directing Defendant Secretary Heffernan to promulgate regulations and rules providing for hearings before neutral-third parties, and notice of same, before bonded warehouses impose fees and before bonded warehouses conclusively deprive individuals of protected interests;

viii. all Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief directing Defendant Secretary Heffernan to promulgate regulations and rules governing the types, amounts, and terms of fees imposed by bonded warehouses under the authority of M.G.L. ch. 140, § 129D;

ix. all Plaintiffs seek such other and further relief, including further injunctiverelief, as may be necessary to effectuate the Court’s judgment, or as is otherwise just and equitable; and

x. attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988

 

Facebook comments:


1 Response » to “Massachusetts suit challenges the permanent forfeiture of firearms without due process”

  1. [...] Massachusetts suit threatens the permanent forfeiture of firearms without due process (March 2012) [...]

Leave a Reply



%d bloggers like this: