Gun Owner Sues Port Authorities for Arrest

sure that he could carry his firearm in pennsylvania prior to section 926a of fopa, entitled "interstate transportation in a locked hard case and ammunition in a separate locked hard federal right that may be remedied by way of � 1983, _______________ constitutionally inadequate." (app. at 53.) revell challenges both the district court's dismissal of question of whether, if he had complied with � 926a, revell the next morning, he took the hotel's airport shuttle back firearm permit and his driver's license. when erickson depriving him of his property without due process. he sought _______________ from the passenger compartment where revell was seated. because his firearm and ammunition were readily accessible to holding that the association did, in fact, have standing to pursue "[plaintiff] has had, and continues to have, notice and an went to the hotel and that erickson did not know whether he officers, including officer erickson, escorted revell to an area revell thus had access to his firearm and ammunition br. at 25.) but, revell's due process claim is not based on firearm, ammunition, holster, locks, and hard cases, which were not in a vehicle. the complaint reveals that revell's luggage notwithstanding any other provision of any law or opportunity to be heard in maryland, and he cannot plausibly "immunize[] non-vehicular transportation if the firearm is not are arrested or charged without probable cause, [i.e., a claim would be futile or constitutionally inadequate, the court before: rendell and jordan, circuit judges, defense that the plaintiff has failed to state a claim is analyzed been forced to stay in the hotel." (app. at 37.) second, even if weapon there because the instructor for his concealed firearm claims for damages and injunctive relief. the court, relying on8 port authority of new york & new jersey revell's due process claim because he did not take advantage of separate locked hard case. he signed an orange firearm amendment claim, "because probable cause [for the arrest and when effecting his arrest. the issue is whether revell has ammunition being transported is readily atkins, 487 u.s. 42, 48 (1988). there is no question that the shirley j. spira richard e. gardiner [argued] holding, revell told erickson that he had picked up his luggage for the third circuit in new jersey. they also argued that erickson was entitled to provided constitutionally adequate notice and an opportunity for his connection from newark to allentown. he booked the next made pursuant to port authority policy as opposed to an passing through new jersey en route to allentown, however, note our concern with the implications of revell's return of property lawfully seized but no longer needed for claim and the associated fourth amendment claim. we newark because he missed his flight, and thus giving him ready access to the gun during that period. the in a march 31, 2009 order, the district court granted the with � 926a and that � 926a preempts new jersey's gun laws of the fourth amendment, as opposed to � 926a, because he complaint in both the state of origin and the state of destination and that august 2, 2005, the essex county prosecutor administratively affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment on replevin, are insufficient. see state v. one 1986 subaru, 576 were readily accessible to him, we need not address revell's otherwise prohibited by this chapter from detail the inaccessibility of the luggage during the shuttle ride to the district court analyzed revell's due process claims to8 for the district of new jersey him during his overnight stay in new jersey. positive conflict between such provision and the statutory provision for a postdeprivation hearing, or a seeking to enjoin the port authority from enforcing against the held in parratt that a state tort claim was an adequate remedy opinion of the court 644 (e.d.n.y. 2008) ("[i]t is simply too much to read into � upon its conclusion that revell was required to bring that claim property can file a replevin action or move to retrieve him had been dismissed and on their failure to provide him retained plaintiff's weapons after seizing them because its claim on behalf of its members. revell v. port auth. of n.y. inquiry ... examine[s] the procedural safeguards built into the arrest, revell's conduct did not bring him within the protection "determine whether 18 u.s.c. � 926a created an enforceable pennsylvania. he also showed the officers his utah concealed not answered the complaint, moved to dismiss for failure to state possess and carry such firearm to any other place deprivation, and any remedies for erroneous deprivations protection. accordingly, we begin our analysis with the complaint stating a fourth amendment claim. without a compartment separate from the driver's defendant to move for the return of property that was unlawfully on march 31, 2005, revell, a resident of utah, embarked question of whether revell was in compliance with � 926a violated his fourth amendment rights because, pursuant to � 10 because there were no more connections to allentown until 9:45 reasonable inferences in favor of the non-movant. gross v. new jersey. the amended complaint also described in greater 13 floor, room 1324th given our disposition, we do not address the more difficult dispute that his conduct violated new jersey law but instead this action. january 26, 2010 erickson knew at the time he arrested revell, arguing that moved for summary judgment, arguing that probable cause 3 be based on probable cause that a crime has been or is being declaration sheet from salt lake city was still in the case with be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful adequate post-deprivation procedures for those who seek the due process claim. county." (app. at 81.) united states, and must show that the alleged deprivation was process." id. at 128. revell's due process claim, arguing that new jersey has in place district judge: honorable katharine s. hayden not long after, on july 13, 2007, revell filed an amended the court thus dismissed revell's � 1983 claim for the alleged in order for revell to prevail either on the theory that he glove compartment or console. while in a vehicle means that, during the owner's travels, they the firearm and ammunition. revell explained that he had grounds, daniels v. williams, 474 u.s. 327 (1986) (overruling purpose from any place where he may lawfully honorable john r. padova, united states district court* further alleged that he returned with his luggage directly to the erickson's motion to dismiss is plenary. see e.i. dupont de that what happened here does not fall within � 926a's scope clause does not "require[] a state or its local entities to give the district court relied on parratt in deciding that because � 926a was inapplicable, given revell's overnight stay declaration tag, which was placed inside the locked hard case senior judge, for the eastern district of pennsylvania, sitting by erickson moved to dismiss revell's claims and the port port authority's motion for judgment on the pleadings and property, and in hudson the court held the same with respect to 21 throckmorton ave. 4 vehicular travel; it does not encompass keeping the weapon � decline to assist him. it may be hoped, however, that officers dismissed all of the charges against him. however, revell's mora v. city of gaithersburg, 519 f.3d 216, 230 (4th cir. 2008) responsibility for transporting revell to allentown. that motion serve to confirm the conclusion that revell had association of new jersey rifle & pistol 14 on his fourth amendment claim.17 remedies, are adequate. he has failed to explain why new although we conclude that revell fell outside of � making an arrest. (appellant's reply br. at 13.) it seems a claim that his or her due-process rights have been violated"); flight to allentown, which was scheduled to leave newark at 8 provided by statute or tort law." id. although a pre-deprivation law dept., opinions & appeals div. revell on his due process claim was proper because he had 22 later voluntarily dismissed his due process claim for injunctive to bring back to utah and that "he was going to need the weapon port authority of new york and new jersey, under the fourth amendment,] it is unnecessary and, indeed, committed by a person acting under color of state law." west v. seized, which revell could have done in light of his claim that 20 vehicle: provided, that in the case of a vehicle 15 clubs, inc. brought a � 1983 claim based on 18 u.s.c. � 926a, port authority of new york and new jersey; while the record is not entirely clear, it appears that1 revell himself testified that he told the officers that he "had under which revell was arrested. the district court found that his fourth amendment claim. he asserts that he never should personal right," an issue of first impression. (app. at 44.) the notice of the basis for the retention of the property and of an transporting a firearm across state lines must ensure that the opportunity for a post-deprivation hearing." (app. at 64.) he 16 his stay in new jersey. that conclusion is fatal to his � 926a complaint, it is clear that revell did not comply with � 926a, so at the allegations of revell's original complaint, it is also clear questioned revell about why he had the firearm, revell procedures. improper ... to conclude that � 1983 provides a separate or fourth amendment claim, the depositions filed in support of court confronted with a rule 12(b)(6) motion must accept the northwest and continental airlines had some shared transport a firearm and ammunition from one state through a turning to the summary judgment motion on revell's (d.c. no. 06-cv-402) qualified immunity. (appellant's op. br. at 26 ("revell should not have been seized at the time of his arrest, were not returned until july 24, 26 926a of fopa. in essence, � 926a allows a person to5 locked in a case or not � in an airport hotel overnight." (app. at declared his weapon and ammunition, and that he was merely (filed: march 22, 2010) his property or the ability to file a separate action for a writ of the district court dismissed revell's � 926a claim based13 precedential among other things, that probable cause existed for the arrest ammunition through new jersey." (app. at 78.) the court arrived at the northwest airlines counter in the salt lake city1 and declared that, in the luggage, he was carrying an unloaded supreme court's decision in graham v. connor, 490 u.s. 386 b. revell's complaint possession any hollow nose or dum-dum bullet, ... is guilty of a for newark, that he had picked up the bag and taken it with argued may well have found a new jersey court sympathetic to a committed. devenpeck v. alford, 543 u.s. 146, 152 (2004); see any rule or regulation of a state or any political because his flight into newark was late, revell missed unauthorized act, a state tort remedy is insufficient and that, nemours & co. v. united states, 508 f.3d 126, 131 (3d cir. although rule 3:5-7 directly speaks to the ability of a19 thus, by the allegations of his own complaint, he was not within for possession of hollow-point ammunition in violation of n.j. action for wrongful conversion of personal property under state his arrest and the seizure of his property were unlawful, revell seized from him" and that the defendants "did not provide him understandably troubled about his and his property's p.m. that evening, but, after the airline changed arrangements, association appealed that ruling to our court and we reversed, a post-deprivation hearing.").) revell has identified no policy court also explained that "� 926a does not address anything but law. based upon 28 u.s.c. � 1291. had a right under � 926a that can be remedied through � 1983 relief, after his property was returned to him. transport his gun, he must first establish that he complied with state procedures available to him for the return of his property. the conditions set forth in � 926a so as to be entitled to its revell also asserted two procedural due process claims � one for for protection" as he drove the car home. (app. at 33.) revell claim that maryland's procedures are unfair when he has not & n.j., 321 f. app'x 113, 117 (3d cir. 2009). the in a triple-whammy for revell, not only had the airline made2 the court also dismissed revell's procedural due process county, new jersey, jail, where he was incarcerated for three 1983 claims seek to remedy perceived violations of his alleged process claim fails and summary judgment was warranted. cf. the firearm nor the ammunition were readily accessible or _____________ 2007); dehart v. horn, 390 f.3d 262, 272 (3d cir. 2004). a jordan, circuit judge. property � based on allegations that the port authority "has no adequate." zinermon v. burch, 494 u.s. 113, 126 (1990). "this amendment claim, alleges the same facts as his original third party plaintiff at the port authority jail, and then transferred to the essex accessible or ... directly accessible from the passenger revell attempts to raise factual disputes concerning what association's lawsuit is not at issue in this appeal. firearm and ammunition were readily accessible to him during complaint against the port authority and erickson. in the first remedies, and that revell failed to avail himself of any of those a state court lawsuit, warranted summary judgment on his due statutory right under � 926a, his fourth amendment rights, and d. revell's amended complaint sharon k. mcgahee energy servs., inc., 264 f.3d 365, 369 (3d cir. 2001). summary 23 deprivation hearing to satisfy due process." (appellant's op. iii. discussion for a prisoner aggrieved by prison officials' negligent loss of his on-the-spot knowledge of the firearms laws of all 50 states."). third party defendants that he had been placed in a difficult predicament through no 225 park avenue south trip that went as expected. the several mishaps that followed determine whether he had also pled a substantive due process stayed overnight. first, revell mischaracterizes the record, as property seizure] developed during ... [erickson's] questioning when he was arrested in new jersey. section 926a does not apply to revell because his bus, instead of a plane, headed for allentown. revell got on the motion under that rule for the return of his property once the immunize revell from arrest for violating new jersey's gun 18 u.s.c. � 926a. revell also alleged that the appellees erickson were entitled to summary judgment on the fourth on june 29, 2007, the district court entered an order truth of all factual allegations in the complaint and must draw all of what the gun owner should do if the law enforcement officers the locked containers during his stay. second state to a third state, without regard to the second state's c. the district court's dismissal of revell's he had access to his firearm and ammunition while at the new the light most favorable to the nonmoving party." id. property without due process "it is necessary to ask what process under the same standards that apply to a rule 12(b)(6) motion. 25 storage area of the van, which was not immediately accessible those facts as true, it is clear that the gun and ammunition were order and the order dismissing his original complaint. night? firearm, holster, locks, containers and ammunition, thereby _______________ q: he told you that he picked up the bag at established state procedures, the state need only provide post- deprivation procedures. hudson, 468 u.s. 517, 533 (1984); could be established based on negligence). the supreme court which contained the locked hard case containers, in the rear a. revell's arrest since the port authority had already answered revell's7 gregg c. revell; on appeal from the united states district court summary judgment motion in accordance with its memorandum his property. parratt, 451 u.s. 527, 543 (1981), overruled in part on other for him overnight. while this no doubt adds to the18 law is a sufficient postdeprivation remedy when it extends to traveling there, but believed that it was legal for him to carry a ammunition were anything but readily accessible to him during grant of summary judgment. jacobs constructors, inc. v. nps approximately a year after he filed his amended complaint in erickson did not know what revell did with his bag when he liability upon the port authority of new york and new jersey 17 clubs inc. occupy the field in which such provision operates 5 bus; however, when he learned that his luggage was not on him." (app. at 33.) specifically, erickson testified as follows: reach the issue of qualified immunity. richard v. gilbert new jersey. they also moved for summary judgment on and padova , district court senior judge* no longer needed for a prosecution, and it is highly unlikely that travel; it does not address this type of interrupted journey or u.s.c. � 926a, which allows gun owners licensed in one state arrest was unlawful because he was in compliance with a 8 6 improperly seized property and "[b]ecause of the availability of also united states v. stubbs, 281 f.3d 109, 122 (3d cir. 2002). containing the firearm. that was apparently the last thing on the subdivision thereof, any person who is not the night at, the airport sheraton hotel." (app. at 23.) he upon police officers such a potentially burdensome requirement. returned to him after he made "a simple request to essex given our conclusion that revell was not protected by � 926a representatives at an airport or to airport personnel before they his � 926a claim and the court's grant of summary judgment on therefore proper.13 arrest and, therefore, no constitutional right was violated. the 3925 chain bridge rd. - #403 jersey's state procedures to recover wrongfully seized property, john does 1-10, erickson for arresting him under new jersey's gun laws and words, the court concluded that, "[b]ecause individuals already luggage, he had missed the bus, and no other connections to designation. alleging that "[d]uring the transportation of the firearm, neither access to his gun and ammunition, contrary to � 926a's one path plaza additionally, the association of new jersey rifle & pistol5 revell's amended complaint, which contains his fourth14 77.) alternatively, the court held that erickson was entitled to opening brief, revell clarified that his claim rests on the the court noted that revell's property was apparently9 a. section 926a and the fourth amendment or on the theory that the fourth amendment should have treatment, revell brought the present � 1983 case, alleging that revell cannot prevail on his due process claim if the days until he was released on bond. four months later, on a claim under rule 12(b)(6). 926a a congressional intent to require local police to have outside � 926a since it is undisputed that revell left the airport 2 hudson v. palmer, the supreme court held that, when a state his fourteenth amendment due process rights. we will first11 when he was arrested in new jersey, we need not address the luggage, opened it with a key that revell gave him. taking 24 therefore affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment 13 judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue of material because we conclude that revell's weapon and ammunition17 damages and one for injunctive relief requiring the return of his fourth amendment, since, as he sees it, � 926a provides a stat. ann. � 2c:39-3(f). revell was handcuffed, held overnight4 before, he had taken possession of his bag with the firearm in it determination, we must consider the evidence in the record in contained in a locked container other than the erickson asked revell whether he had authority to carry the luggage to newark, instead of allentown, as his final port authority of new york & new jersey like revell have the option of going to law enforcement v. summary judgment, respectively, on those claims. we also perkins, 525 u.s. 234, 236 (1999) (holding that due process of firearms," provides: complaint, it moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to b. due process succeed on his due process claim. since revell neither availed the firearm is not readily accessible during the transportation.6 said he had been forced to stay overnight at a hotel in newark german found. indus. initiative, 549 f.3d 605, 610 (3d cir. provides that "[a]ny person, ... who knowingly has in his around 8:30 a.m., he proceeded to the ticket counter to check his minneapolis/st. paul and newark, new jersey. when he during his stay at the new jersey hotel, whether or not he in fact same subject matter, unless there is a direct and turbe v. gov't of the v.i., 938 f.2d 427, 428 (3d cir. 1991). passenger compartment of such transporting new york, ny 10003 doubtful that, in passing � 926a, congress intended to impose section 927 of title 18, captioned "effect on state law,"12 rayed. after the luggage went through the x-ray machine, the his situation, requesting that his firearm and ammunition be held 926a's protection during his stay in new jersey, we recognize under the circumstances presented here. he also challenges12 post-deprivation procedure for revell to recover the [property] violation and concluded that he had not. that issue is not on failed to take advantage of available state remedies for the return him miss his connection and then put him on a bus instead of a district court also concluded that summary judgment against 7 plane, a northwest employee had mistakenly checked his fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of his reach in the rear of the shuttle. upon arriving at the airport provision of the firearm owners' protection act ("fopa"), 18 indicating an intent on the part of the congress to requiring officers of the port authority to retain property that is did not open either of the locked hard cases while he was in 2008). a motion for judgment on the pleadings based on the counsel for appellant compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be count, he asserted that his arrest and the seizure of his property directly accessible from the passenger compartment of the having obtained a permit to carry the same as provided in conclusion that having the firearm and ammunition inaccessible revell's claims as revell's � 926a claim, his fourth amendment claim, and his gregg c. revell, his overnight stay in new jersey.").) accordingly, revell was for example, in parratt v. taylor, and thereafter in dismissed that claim. however, it granted revell leave to seizing his firearm and ammunition. according to revell, his argument that � 926a requires an officer to "investigate the laws iv. conclusion circumstances. because we conclude that, at the time of his hudson does apply. see case v. eslinger, 555 f.3d 1317, 1331 such as the ability to move in the criminal action for return of regulations. n.j.s.2c:58-4, is guilty of a crime" of the second or third degree following morning with his bags. see also n.j. rule 3:5-7 (motion for return of property) and19 pleadings or the record indicates that revell's handgun and to satisfy the fourth amendment, a warrantless arrest must16 revell acknowledged he "had the firearm with him when he left amendment claim, revell asserts that the district court erred in qualified immunity against the fourth amendment claim. evan f. nappen also informed erickson that, upon missing his flight the day (internal quotations omitted)). to carry firearms through another state under certain revell also asserts that the district court erroneously because he had missed his flight. erickson also testified that allentown were available. he then went directly to the newark a prisoner whose property was intentionally destroyed by a 19 explained that he was traveling to pennsylvania to pick up a car revell stayed at the hotel overnight but did not open either of readily accessible to revell during his stay in new jersey and, damages and an injunction requiring the port authority to return defendants' initial seizure of the property. instead, in his notice and an opportunity for a post-deprivation hearing. officer would be entitled to infer from revell's statements that as the record supports the judgment." johnson v. orr, 776 f.2d of the jurisdiction from which the traveler was traveling and the eatontown, nj 07724 firearm in pennsylvania, but revell did not respond.3 inconvenience imposed upon the unfortunate traveler when his violated his fourteenth amendment rights by retaining his jersey hotel. whether revell in fact accessed them is irrelevant. (11th cir. 2009) ("we have recognized that a civil cause of requirement. erickson testified that, under questioning, revell14 hearing is generally required before a state seizes a person's airport sheraton hotel in a hotel shuttle, taking his luggage with subject to arrest for violating new jersey's gun laws. we will16 protected him from arrest because � 926a gave him a right to a shuttle to a nearby hotel, and then returned to the airport the e. the district court grants summary judgment on containing the firearm was, in fact, available to him while he ii. standard of review10 what the traveler is to do in this situation. stranded gun owners can be freely accessible for hours at a time as long as they are firearm if, during such transportation the firearm ______________ airport the next day and that a tsa agent, after x-raying the pursuant to the memorandum opinion. qualified immunity. they asserted that � 926a did not transportation plans go awry, it offers a reasonable means for a essex county jail; essex county prosecutor; 11 of course, this suggestion leaves unanswered the question18 him. the driver of the shuttle van placed revell's luggage, away from other passengers where they questioned him about charges against him were dropped. qualified immunity because probable cause existed for revell's instead, "there must be a statutory provision for a post- our review of the district court's decision to grant the have a method of recovering damages pursuant to � 1983 if they following discovery, the port authority and erickson constitutionally adequate state procedures were available to only the most strained reading of the statute could lead to the scott erickson independent of the fourth amendment. as to his fourth the state provided, and whether it was constitutionally address the � 926a claim and the fourth amendment claim, concerning revell's transportation of a handgun and 75, 83 n.7 (3d cir. 1985). based solely on the allegations of the compartment of [the] transporting vehicle." id. looking solely we can affirm the district court's dismissal on that basis alone. _____________ accessible or is directly accessible from the of his property, namely, a state court lawsuit.9 court correctly noted. (app. at 77 ("[n]othing in the15 crime of the fourth degree." alternative remedy for a violation of � 926a." (app. at 49.) fairfax, va 22030 dismissing revell's complaint and allowing him leave to amend appellant. court answered that question by holding that, pursuant to the where he may lawfully possess and carry such security administration ("tsa") area so that it could be x- appeal. the district court had jurisdiction over revell's claims10 a: yes. responsible gun owner to maintain the protection of section 926 prison guard. transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall state's post-deprivation procedures, including state tort pursuant to 28 u.s.c. �� 1331 and 1343. our jurisdiction is officer randomly and without authorization departs from the district court's conclusion that erickson was entitled to reconciled or consistently stand together. depending on the nature of the handgun. section 2c:39-3(f) on a flight from salt lake city to allentown, pennsylvania, via the firearm. 4:61-1 (replevin). nor has revell shown any entitlement to have been required to re-frame his � 926a claim in terms of the to determine whether an individual has been deprived of his continental airlines; county of essex; permit class did not mention that he could not do so. deprived of the property after august 2, 2005 without being retrieve their luggage. the careful owner will do so and explain based claim and the grant of summary judgment to the port property, "[i]n some circumstances ... the court has held that a was at the hotel. he alleged that, "[a]fter retrieving his bag, (1989), revell was required to frame his � 1983 claim in terms law. id. (citing fed. r. civ. p. 56(c)). "in making this specifically, and returning to the same � 926a theme, he says aircraft or the bus [that he took to the hotel]." (app. at 25.) but of a firearm and hollow-point bullets in violation of new jersey ammunition and are thus key to this dispute. erickson arrested revell for possession of a handgun i. background tried to avail himself of them."). airport, he checked his luggage through to his final destination authority and erickson on revell's closely related fourth with his luggage for an overnight stay at a hotel in new jersey, out and asked revell for the key to them, which revell sought damages for an allegedly improper arrest. in other unauthorized seizures of personal property by state officers." tsa agent at the other end of the machine took the hard cases opinion. revell timely appealed both the summary judgment amend his complaint to allege that "the port authority's violation of � 926a, but it granted him leave to file an amended ammunition in his luggage, notwithstanding new jersey law. gun laws, provided that the traveler is licensed to carry a firearm the scope of � 926a. dismissal of the � 926a claim was police investigation or criminal prosecution"). thus, his due missing his flight to allentown, he retrieved his luggage, took found persuasive the defense argument that revell's conduct fell amendment claim. we will likewise affirm the grant of brought pursuant to 42 u.s.c. � 1983, seeking to impose within the protection provided by that statute. revell does not is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any section 2c:39-5(b) provides that "[a]ny person who4 ("port authority") and port authority police officer scott alleged a violation of any right under federal law. revell's � to the exclusion of the law of any state on the the district court held that the port authority and laws because, contrary to an express requirement of � 926a, with regard to whether probable cause existed for his arrest,15 18 u.s.c. � 926a. it is clear from the statute that a person under the fourteenth amendment. no. 09-2029 see torraco v. port auth. of n.y. & n.j., 539 f. supp. 2d 632, there is no question that erickson observed revell in possession firearm and any ammunition being transported is not "readily that the district court incorrectly determined that he did not fall united states court of appeals q: and did he tell you that he went to a hotel that postdeprivation remedies for the return of seized property are detailed and specific instructions or advice to owners who seek _______________ counsel for appellees violation of a right secured by the constitution and laws of the donald f. burke, sr. [argued] revell's weapon was readily accessible to him during his stay in association's non-resident members the new jersey statutes and had gone to a hotel in newark to stay for the night. result reached by the district court on reasons that differ so long erickson were required to consider � 926a's impact in his remedy the deprivation of revell's property, he could not accessed them and regardless of whether they were accessible we also exercise plenary review over an appeal from a gregg c. revell appeals from the dismissal of his claims, law of the state so that the two cannot be before turning to the due process claim. of that statute, we will affirm both the dismissal of his � 926a- a: yes. 18 9 while he was traveling by plane or van. that crucial fact takes revell outside the scope of � 926a's protection, as the district and removed the firearm and ammunition. the orange without a permit in violation of n.j. stat. ann. � 2c:39-5(b) and at his deposition, revell stated that he did not check to make3 will not compound a blameless owner's problems in that way. 21 about twenty minutes later, several port authority to the newark airport and, again, his luggage was placed out of pursuant to the fourth amendment. but, we "may affirm a federal rule of civil procedure 12(c), while erickson, who had (rejecting plaintiff's procedural due process claim, when police v. concluding that probable cause existed for his arrest. more 2008, more than two years after the ill-fated trip and special notice of those procedures. see city of w. covina v. a.m. the following morning ... , [he] went directly to, and stayed supported revell's arrest and that erickson is protected by laws of the jurisdiction to which the traveler was going" prior to statutory or administrative procedure of effecting the the association lacked standing and dismissed its claim. the the port authority and erickson had violated his rights under � provided. the tsa agent opened the cases using revell's key revell's failure to take advantage of available remedies, namely defendants' retention of his property after the charges against probable cause analysis, an issue on which we express no interrelation between � 926a and probable cause. we do, (id.) revell's own deposition further confirms that, upon any such policy exists. accordingly, the rationale of parratt and process claim. revell argues that, because his deprivation was summary judgment against revell on his due process claim "to state a claim under � 1983, a plaintiff must allege the provides: the text of � 926a is set forth in section iii.a, infra.6 parratt v. taylor, 451 u.s. 527 (1981), explained that, if v. would have been able to pursue a � 1983 claim based upon � destination. and prevent unexpected exposure to state and local gun a.2d 859, 318 (n.j. 1990) (explaining that owner of seized 926a. complaint, with the addition of one new allegation � that revell parratt to the extent it suggested that a constitutional injury luggage and declared that he was carrying an unloaded firearm common-law tort remedy for erroneous deprivation, satisfies due readily accessible." (appellant's op. br. at 32.) nor do we [such] procedures ... , a claimant's inaction may weigh against from the airport and went to a hotel for the night. a reasonable ultimately relate to the accessibility of the firearm and for ease of reference, we will refer to those � 1983 claims11 and from the airport to the hotel. authority moved for judgment on the pleadings. they argued,7 the district court noted that its first task was to 926a, he was legally entitled to carry the firearm and accordingly affirm the district court's dismissal and grant of case. revell was told to take his luggage to the transportation argument that � 926a should be broadly construed to granted summary judgment on his due process claim. in order revell attempts to invoke the protection of the statute by return of property seized upon arrest, including state tort himself of state law remedies nor explained why those remedies fault of his own. however, section 926 clearly requires the the passengers scheduled for that flight were asked to board a no provision of this chapter shall be construed as claims that he was not subject to arrest because he complied knowingly has in his possession any handgun, ... without first firearm contained in a locked hard case and ammunition in a went out of the airport, correct? 12 board, he got off to locate it. by the time he retrieved his2 jersey city, nj 07306 defendants in revell's suit were acting under color of state law traveler to part ways with his weapon and ammunition during