Mike Barry, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, California

The Petitioners’ transient hotel in the City of Los Angeles was declared a residential hotel pursuant to the City’s Residential Hotel Unit Conversion and Demolition Ordinance. They were cited in 2023 by the City for allegedly operating the hotel as a transient hotel. They exercised their choice of forum by filing a lawsuit in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a regulatory taking of in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and seeking just compensation, costs, and attorneys’ fees and a pendent state claim petition for writ of mandate concerning the citation. The federal court abstained from deciding the state writ petition and stayed Petitioners’ federal civil rights takings claim under Railroad Commission of Texas v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 (1941), pending the state court’s determination of the writ claim. The question presented is: Whether federal courts in invoking the Pullman abstention doctrine in a Fifth Amendment takings claim filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, requiring plaintiffs to first litigate their pendent claims in state court imposes an unjustifiable burden on plaintiffs that conflicts with this Court’s decision in Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, 588 U.S. 139 S.Ct. 2162 (2019) and the Court’s takings jurisprudence.