Case ID: f-appx_53/html/0190-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WEIS, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Norman CHRISTMAN and Diane Christman, husband and wife, Appellants, v. Robert SANDT; City of Allentown.
    No. 02-1761.
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 1, 2002.
    Decided Nov. 4, 2002.
    
      Before NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges, and IRENAS, District Judge.
    
      
       The Honorable Joseph E. Irenas, United States District Judge for the District of New Jersey, sitting by designation.
    
   OPINION

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

In this case, the District Court granted summary judgment for the defendants concluding that they properly conducted an administrative search of plaintiffs’ home. Because the parties are familiar with the details of this case and the judgment will be non-precedential, it is not necessary to review the factual background at length.

The defendant, City of Allentown, enacted an ordinance providing for a systematic inspection of residential units to insure that they comply with applicable local ordinances, state laws and regulations. When plaintiffs refused defendants entry into their rental unit, the city inspector secured a warrant and entered the house in the presence of uniformed police. Once inside, the inspection revealed a number of items that required repair.

The plaintiffs contend that the search warrant was deficient on its face, and that their Fourth Amendment rights were violated. We have reviewed the submissions of the parties and agree with the District Court’s conclusions that the ordinance is reasonable, that the warrant was properly issued, and that the defendants’ constitutional rights were not violated. See Camara v. Municipal Court of the City and County San Francisco, 387 U.S. 523, 87 S.Ct. 1727, 18 L.Ed.2d 930 (1967).

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court will be affirmed.