Suit challenges charges in vehicle impounding Legal action stems from November 2005 case in Manalapan BY KATHY BARATTA Staff Writer MANALAPAN - Litigation recently filed in federal court could result in a precedent-setting decision with implications that would reach beyond Manalapan, according to the person who filed the legal action. Samuel Abady, of New York, has retained the services of attorney Samuel Z. Brown, of Lakewood, to represent him in his challenge of the legalities that attend the impounding of vehicles in New Jersey due to the issuance of motor vehicle summonses to the driver. Abady is an attorney who practices civil rights law in New York. The incident that gave rise to the litigation occurred in Manalapan in November. According to Abady, a mistake that was later proven to be a data entry error led the police officer who stopped him to conclude that Abady was driving his motorcycle with a suspended driver's license. Abady is not taking issue with the officer who made the motor vehicle stop, nor is his litigation challenging whether the impounding of his motorcycle was a legal search and seizure. In fact, he praised the conduct of the officer who, he said, had to proceed as he (the officer) did in the matter because of the law as it is now written. Abady said he pointed out to the officer that the registration of the motorcycle he was driving was only 2 months old, preceding the purported date of his alleged license suspension. He said that meant he had to be telling the truth about his license not being suspended on the date reported by the computer since he would not have been able to register the motorcycle on the date reflected on the vehicle's registration if he had not had a valid driver's license at the time of the registration. Abady said the police officer conceded this would be so in New Jersey, but told him that since he was not trained in New York law or legal procedure, he could only operate within what the law in New Jersey proscribed for someone the state computer was reporting had a suspended driving license. Abady said he eventually prevailed in court, proving he had been a legally licensed driver at the time the officer issued the summons and impounded his motorcycle. Abady said when he went to retrieve his motorcycle from Boyce Towing, Manalapan, the township's contracted vendor, the firm wanted $3,000 from him before it would release the motorcycle. Abady said it was not just the fee, which covered the time period from Nov. 11, 2005, to Feb. 23, 2006, that he was contesting, but the right of Boyce Towing or Manalapan to not only impose the fee, but also to insist on collecting it when the judge had found in his favor. "The fee is unfair whether [the motorcycle] was held for one day or one year," he said. Abady claims that if he was found blameless in court, that means he violated no ordinance, committed no crime, and therefore should not have to pay to retrieve his motorcycle. "It's not that the impound was wrongful, it was the refusal to release [the motorcycle] that was wrongful," he maintained. Abady said his case is not so much about the initial seizure of his motorcycle, but the policy that provides for it. He claims the case revolves around the unlawful deprivation of property and believes it violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which states, in part, "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." Some New Jersey towns have their own vehicle impound yards and others, like Manalapan, contract the service to private companies. Abady said one of the issues of his litigation involves the fee he was charged by Boyce Towing for the storage of his motorcycle. According to Abady, although the municipal ordinance regarding the township's seizure of vehicles stipulates a $20 per day storage fee for the contractor storing the impounded vehicle, Abady said Boyce billed him $30 per day because the motorcycle was stored indoors. Abady concedes Boyce told him at the time of impound that he was imposing an additional $10 per day charge because Abady was insisting on inside storage for his motorcycle. Abady said he is challenging Boyce's right to impose any additional fee over the fee that is stipulated in the ordinance. Boyce confirmed to a reporter that he did impose an additional $10 per day charge for the motor vehicle storage and that he was aware the ordinance stipulates a $20 per day charge. He said he felt he was within his right to do so even though the language of the ordinance does not specifically address the matter of indoor or outdoor storage of impounded vehicles. Abady said the crux of the litigation and the challenge he is making is that municipalities do not have the right to impound a vehicle based on the issuance of a motor vehicle summons. Otherwise, he claims, the issuance of the summonses alone would become a revenue-generating enterprise for the municipality or the private contractor, irrespective of the fact that the summons may be dismissed in court and the motorist found blameless. Abady said it will be up to a federal judge to decide whether a municipality has the right to impound a vehicle and charge a fee for the release of that vehicle when a court has determined there has been no violation of law by the vehicle's owner. When asked for a comment in the matter, Township Attorney James Kinneally said, "We're relying on a state statute that regulates the impoundment of vehicles." The matter is scheduled for a court hearing later this month.