State wants out of lawsuit over its wrongful eviction of family

The state of Delaware and several of its police officers were sued after an eviction notice citing the name Viola Wilson was served on William Murphy and he and his daughters were thrown out of their legally occupied rental home in the middle of a raging winter storm.

The constables forced the eviction even though they admitted he was not, in fact, Viola Wilson.

Murphy had explained he had been living in his home for months and produced his fully executed lease to the constables, who accepted and read it several times.

But they rejected the evidence, tossing Murphy onto the streets in the midst of a snowstorm, claiming the lease wasn’t valid because it wasn’t notarized or “watersealed,” actions that are not required in Delaware.

Now the state has filed a motion to dismiss the case, insisting it be allowed to escape the consequences of its actions which are described as violating both the Constitution and federal law.

It is the Rutherford Institute that is working on behalf of the family, and now has responded to the state demands with arguments that the case should, in fact, be allowed to proceed.

“As this case makes clear, justice in America makes less sense with each passing day,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “With every ruling handed down, it becomes more apparent that we live in an age of hollow justice, with government courts, largely lacking in vision and scope, rendering narrow rulings focused on the letter of the law. This is true at all levels of the judiciary, where the courts have become fixated on upholding government order and siding with government agents rather than with safeguarding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.”

The institute is challenging the state’s “evict first, ask questions later,” policy which targeted Murphy and his two teenage daughters.

Specifically, the state and its officers are accused of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fourth Amendment, and the 14th Amendment.

Murphy, 52 and blind, is the sole caregiver for his two daughters, aged 17 and 11. After losing his job in Maryland, Murphy moved to Wilmington, Delaware, in order to find work. He found a 775-square foot rowhouse to rent for $700 per month and was to receive rental assistance from the local social services department, the institute explained.

Then the landlord allegedly raised the rent to $750, required that a family member co-sign the lease, and expressed reluctance to rent the property to Murphy because he was blind and supporting two children.

Eventually, the family moved in, but three months later, the landlord reportedly shut off water and electricity service. Then, “during a bitterly cold snowstorm, police arrived at the Murphy home, ordered them to vacate the premises, and gave the family 30 minutes to collect their belongings and leave.”

The officers rejected Murphy’s documentation that he held a lease and was paid up.

A judge later found the eviction to be wrong, and the institute sued on behalf of the family.

WND reported when the case developed the police were accused of bulldozing over the family’s constitutional and statutory rights.

Wilson reportedly was the name of a previous tenant in the home.

After the judge threw out the eviction, Murphy chose to cancel the rest of the lease and found other accommodations.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

Related Posts