Zorectic v. Darge

Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendants-Deputy Sheriffs’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that defendants violated plaintiff-tenant’s 4^th Amendment rights when they entered plaintiff’s apartment and evicted her based on eviction order that no longer applied, where plaintiff had previously been evicted based on said order, but was allowed to return to her apartment. Record showed that plaintiff obtained court order less than week after second eviction that allowed her to return to instant apartment until landlord obtained second eviction order, and defendants could not rely on quasi-judicial immunity since they entered plaintiff’s apartment without valid eviction order. Fact that clerk had re-stamped more recent date on initial eviction order did not allow defendants ability to claim quasi-judicial immunity, where clerk played no role in issuance of eviction order. Dist. Ct., though, did not err in granting defendant-landlord’s motion for summary judgment with respect to plaintiff’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, since plaintiff failed to show that landlord knew that its attempt to evict plaintiff (who had otherwise failed to pay rent for long period of time) was unlawful, especially where landlord had sought legal advice prior to attempting to evict plaintiff.