Meadows v. Rockford Housing Authority

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that plaintiff’s 4^th Amendment rights were violated when defendants-employees of private security company changed locks on plaintiff’s apartment pursuant to directive from administrator at city housing authority that owned apartment building. Dist. Ct. could properly find that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity under Filarsky, 566 U.S. 377, where supervising governmental officer at public housing agency issued directive to change said locks. Fact that defendants were employees of private company did not require different result, although result would be different if defendants had worked independently of any ongoing direct supervision by housing agency.