In Pimental v. City of Los Angeles, published July 22, 2020, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part summary judgment granted to the defendant city in a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 lawsuit. The plaintiffs challenged the city's initial fines and late fees for parking past the allotted time at parking meters. The initial fine is $63. If the fine is not paid within 58 days, late fees are applied, which could raise the amount owed to $181. The plaintiffs contended the initial fine and late fees violated the Excessive Fines clause of the Eighth Amendment. The district court concluded that the fines and late fees were not grossly disproportional to the underlying offense.
The 9th Circuit affirmed summary judgment as to the initial fine. It concluded that the Excessive Fines clause of the Eighth Amendment applies to municipal parking fees. Therefore, the court applied a four-factor test to determine whether the fine was excessive: (1) the nature and extent of the underlying
offense; (2) whether the underlying offense related to other illegal activities; (3) whether other penalties may be imposed for the offense; and (4) the extent of the harm caused by the offense. Applying the factors, the appellate court agreed with the district court that $63 was not grossly disproportional to the offense of overstaying the time at the parking meter, in light of the harm done to traffic flow from vehicles looking for parking places. But the district court had not applied the four-factor test to the late fees. The panel remanded the case to the district court to perform this analysis. A concurring judge opined that the excessive-fines clause should not routinely apply to parking meter violations.
Comments