| |
| | Soldal v. Cook County, Ill., 506 U.S. 56 (1992). (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-09-18) |
 | | Acknowledging that what had occurred was a "seizure" in the literal sense of the word, the court reasoned that, because it was not made in the course of public law enforcement and because it did not invade the Soldals' privacy, it was not a seizure as contemplated by the Fourth Amendment. |
 | | Believing that the Soldals' claim was more akin to a challenge against the deprivation of property without due process of law than against an unreasonable seizure, the court concluded that they should not be allowed to bring their suit under the guise of the Fourth Amendment. |
 | | Even if the court meant that seizures of property in the course of law enforcement activities, whether civil or criminal, implicate interests safeguarded by the Fourth Amendment, but that pure property interests are unprotected in the nonlaw enforcement setting, we are not in accord, as indicated in the body of this opinion. |
| supct.law.cornell.edu /supct/html/91-6516.ZO.html (4419 words) |
|