Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca3-24-01567/USCOURTS-ca3-24-01567-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bryn Mawr Fire Co
Appellee
Christopher B. Flanagan
Appellee
Brett Geaves
Appellee
Christopher Gluck
Appellee
Karimu Hamilton
Appellant
Kevin Kochanski
Appellee
Patrick Lacey
Appellee
Andrew Pancoast
Appellee
Shawn Patterson
Appellee
Stephanie Racht
Appellee
Justin Ridgeway
Appellee
Rachel Ridgeway
Appellee

Document Text:

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_______________

No. 24-1567

_______________

KARIMU HAMILTON,

Appellant

v.

CHRISTOPHER B. FLANAGAN; ANDREW PANCOAST; KEVIN KOCHANSKI; 

RACHEL RIDGEWAY; JUSTIN RIDGEWAY; 

RADNOR POLICE OFFICERS Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; 

SHAWN PATTERSON; STEPHANIE RACHT; PATRICK LACEY;

SGT. CHRISTOPHER GLUCK; BRETT GEAVES; BRYN MAWR FIRE COMPANY

_______________

On Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. No. 2:19-cv-02599)

Chief District Judge: Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg

_______________

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) 

on December 13, 2024

Before: BIBAS, CHUNG, and ROTH, Circuit Judges

(Filed: December 17, 2024)

_______________

OPINION*

_______________

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and, under I.O.P. 5.7, is not binding 

precedent.

Case: 24-1567 Document: 46 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2024
2

BIBAS, Circuit Judge. 

Like good fences, good sewage systems make good neighbors. Karimu Hamilton owns 

one half of a duplex in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania; Rachel and Justin Ridgeway own the 

other half. On December 3, 2018, the Ridgeways smelled gas or sewage coming from 

Hamilton’s house, so they called 911 to report the smell. Two firefighters knocked on her

door and said they wanted to check for gas leaks. Hamilton let them in, and police officer 

Patterson slipped in as well. The firefighters tested for gas, found cyanide gas, and told 

Hamilton to open her windows. She told them that her water had been off for two weeks 

and the gas probably came in through the pipes. They were there for all of six minutes. 

The next evening, a county social worker came to Hamilton’s house with roughly six 

police officers to check if her house was safe for her six-year-old daughter. Hamilton let 

the social worker and police officer Racht come inside. They did a ten-minute walkthrough and confirmed that the house was suitable for her daughter.

Town officials soon sent Hamilton a notice ordering her to have a plumber inspect her 

pipes. When she did not comply, they sent a follow-up notice a month later ordering her to 

fix two plumbing issues within ten days. In April, they sued her to make her comply. But 

she refused to open the door to the process server and did not have that work done. 

In June, the Ridgeways again called 911, this time to report the smells of gas and smoke 

coming out of Hamilton’s house. Firefighters smelled sewer gas, but Hamilton would not 

let them or police in. She let in a representative of the gas company, who found no gas leak 

but did identify a strong sewage odor coming from Hamilton’s basement, which he

reported to the police. 

Case: 24-1567 Document: 46 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2024
3

Three days later, Justin Ridgeway called 911 yet again to report that Hamilton was 

outside, holding a saw blade and cursing him loudly but not threatening him. The 

dispatcher alerted police officers that someone with a knife was threatening neighbors. 

Hamilton says she was walking with hedge trimmers. Officer Lacey arrived, pointed a gun 

at her, and ordered her to freeze and sit down, but she kept standing. Within minutes, he 

holstered his gun. Another officer told her to wait for the police chief, who arrived and 

asked to search her home. She refused consent, and police left. That whole encounter lasted 

about twenty-six minutes.

Three days after that, twenty police officers arrived with an administrative search 

warrant. Hamilton let them in. The house was filthy, with raw sewage in the basement, an 

overflowing toilet, rat and mouse feces, collapsed ceilings, and a sump pump pumping 

sewage out a basement window. A town official declared the house unfit to live in, so 

Hamilton moved out. After a court ordered her to fix the house, she did and moved back in 

the next year. 

Hamilton then filed this civil-rights suit under 42 U.S.C. §1983. She claimed that the 

warrantless searches violated the Fourth Amendment; that police had falsely arrested her 

and used excessive force; that they had evicted her without due process; and that they did 

all this because she is black, violating equal protection. 

The District Court granted summary judgment for defendants and sanctioned 

Hamilton’s lawyer. We commend it for patiently parsing the briefing and factual record. 

We review de novo, drawing all inferences in favor of Hamilton. Tundo v. County of 

Passaic, 923 F.3d 283, 286–87 (3d Cir. 2019). Even so, all her claims fail.

Case: 24-1567 Document: 46 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/17/2024
4

The Ridgeways cannot be sued under §1983 because they never acted under color of 

state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). They are simply neighbors, private 

parties rather than state actors. Calling 911 to report misbehavior, even falsely, is not 

enough. Hamilton alleges that they conspired with police but has no evidence of that. See 

Cruz v. Donnelly, 727 F.2d 79, 80 (3d Cir. 1984). The District Court properly concluded 

that she has no claim against them.

She also has no Fourth Amendment claim against the firefighters or police officers. The 

firefighters entered Hamilton’s home only once, when she consented to their search. See 

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 (1973). When they asked to enter again 

another time, she refused entry, so they never searched her house. Officer Patterson entered 

Hamilton’s house in response to the reported smell of gas. The District Court correctly held 

that qualified immunity shields Patterson because existing precedent does not “squarely 

govern[].” Kisela v. Hughes, 584 U.S. 100, 104 (2018). On appeal, Hamilton does not 

identify governing precedent, but instead challenges that holding in a single sentence. That 

silence forfeits the issue. See Santomenno ex rel. John Hancock Tr. v. John Hancock Life 

Ins. Co. (U.S.A.), 768 F.3d 284, 292 n.3 (3d Cir. 2014). Finally, Officer Racht entered with 

the social worker, but only with Hamilton’s consent.

Nor was there any arrest or unreasonably long detention that could count as a false 

arrest. During the twenty-six-minute interaction, the officers were working diligently to 

accomplish the purpose of the stop. Baker v. Monroe Twp., 50 F.3d 1186, 1192 (3d Cir. 

1995). The only excessive force alleged was that Office Lacey pointed his gun at her for at 

most six minutes, but he did that after hearing that someone with a knife was threatening 

Case: 24-1567 Document: 46 Page: 4 Date Filed: 12/17/2024
5

neighbors. The District Court held that Lacey was entitled to qualified immunity. Hamilton, 

again, did not challenge the District Court’s application of qualified immunity on appeal, 

so she again forfeits the issue.

There is no evidence of racial discrimination and so no equal-protection violation. As 

Hamilton admits, white residents have likewise been evicted from houses unfit to live in. 

Hamilton also got due process. The town warned her of the plumbing problems three 

times starting in December 2018, almost seven months before she was evicted. She 

challenges the June administrative search warrant, arguing that there was no cyanide gas 

or sewage and that her house was habitable. But she offers no evidence that the affidavit 

supporting the warrant was untruthful or that officers had reason to doubt it. And she cites 

no authority requiring police to have personal knowledge of or verify the underlying facts.

Finally, Hamilton challenges how the District Court handled her case. It denied in 

camera review of some documents and sanctioned her attorney. Hamilton waited until her 

reply brief to challenge the District Court’s finding of privilege and thus forfeited the issue. 

See Hoxworth v. Blinder, Robinson & Co., Inc., 903 F.2d 186, 204 n.29 (3d Cir. 1990). 

And the sanctions were proper. Hamilton’s lawyer made frivolous objections and 

postponed a deposition by himself, defying the District Court’s instructions.

Because all her claims are meritless, we will affirm the District Court’s grant of 

summary judgment.

Case: 24-1567 Document: 46 Page: 5 Date Filed: 12/17/2024