West Case Update

Property Owners Must Have Opportunity to Challenge Decisions to Remove Nuisances

Description
Iowa high court held that it violated due process for a city ordinance to allow city officials to decide when vehicles where junk and would be taken with no opportunity for the property owners to contest the decision.

Topic Constitutional Law

Key Words
Due Process; Nuisance Abatement

C A S E S U M M A R Y

Facts
Kistler owns three properties in Perry, Iowa. The city objected to the number of junk vehicles sitting on the property and sent Kistler a notice to remove the vehicles within 14 days. He did not, so the city seized the vehicles as in violation of the nuisance abatement ordinance. Kistler sued, contending the city did not give him an opportunity to challenge the claim that the vehicles were junk and a nuisance. The district court upheld the city's action. Kistler appealed.

Decision
Reversed and remanded. The nuisance abatement ordinance allowing a compliance officer to determine the existence of a nuisance and to take action to abate the nuisance without opportunity for a hearing violates due process. While cities may act against junk vehicles, property owners must be given notice of the decision and the opportunity to challenge the determination before action is taken.

Citation
Kistler v. City of Perry, ---N.W.2d--- (2006 WL 2325216, Sup. Ct., Iowa, 2006)

Back to Constitutional Law Listings

Property Owners Must Have Opportunity to Challenge Decisions to Remove Nuisances
Description	Iowa high court held that it violated due process for a city ordinance to allow city officials to decide when vehicles where junk and would be taken with no opportunity for the property owners to contest the decision.
Topic	Constitutional Law
Key Words	Due Process; Nuisance Abatement
C A S E S U M M A R Y
Facts	Kistler owns three properties in Perry, Iowa. The city objected to the number of junk vehicles sitting on the property and sent Kistler a notice to remove the vehicles within 14 days. He did not, so the city seized the vehicles as in violation of the nuisance abatement ordinance. Kistler sued, contending the city did not give him an opportunity to challenge the claim that the vehicles were junk and a nuisance. The district court upheld the city's action. Kistler appealed.
Decision	Reversed and remanded. The nuisance abatement ordinance allowing a compliance officer to determine the existence of a nuisance and to take action to abate the nuisance without opportunity for a hearing violates due process. While cities may act against junk vehicles, property owners must be given notice of the decision and the opportunity to challenge the determination before action is taken.
Citation	Kistler v. City of Perry, ---N.W.2d--- (2006 WL 2325216, Sup. Ct., Iowa, 2006)