Lewen v. Edinboro U.: who cares if there's not a gun registry?

[MDJschool]

LEWEN v. EDINBORO UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, Dist. Court, WD Pennsylvania 2011
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...66460123639276

This matter is before the Court upon a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Edinboro University of Pennsylvania ("Edinboro University"), the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education ("PASSHE"), Edinboro Dean of Student Affairs Dr. Kahan Sablo ("Sablo") and Edinboro Chief of Campus Police Thomas Nelson ("Nelson"). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. For the reasons which follow, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss will be granted.

. . .

The following day, August 29, 2007, police officer Robert Burns arrived at Plaintiff's dorm room and indicated that he had been told that Plaintiff needed assistance storing a gun. (Complaint, ¶ 3.19). Plaintiff retrieved the unloaded gun and 17 bullets from her dorm room and accompanied Officer Burns to the Edinboro University police department where the gun was placed in storage. (Complaint, ¶ 3.20). Officer Burns informed Plaintiff that she could retrieve the gun at the end of the school year. (Complaint, ¶ 3.20).

Shortly after leaving the police station, Plaintiff's family members began contacting her to express concern that they had heard rumors that she had been "waving a gun around on campus" and was going to be kicked out of graduate school. (Complaint, ¶ 3.21). Later that evening, Plaintiff was visited by another police officer who asked her to accompany him from her dorm room to the police station. (Complaint, ¶ 3.26). Upon arrival, she was greeted by Defendants Nelson and Sablo who allegedly informed her that she had committed a criminal act by possessing an unregistered handgun on Edinboro University grounds and that she was in "big trouble." (Complaint, ¶¶ 3.27, 3.29a). According to Plaintiff, Nelson and Sablo told her that if she signed an agreement to voluntarily withdraw from Edinboro University, she would not be prosecuted and no disciplinary action would be taken. (Complaint, ¶ 3.29c). Despite Plaintiff's protestations that she had not done anything wrong, she eventually signed a withdrawal form and spent the night at a local hotel. (Complaint, ¶ 3.29g). As part of her withdrawal, Plaintiff was permanently banned from setting foot on Edinboro University's campus without prior written permission from Nelson or Sablo. (Complaint, ¶ 3.29h).

In her Complaint, Plaintiff contends that she had not committed any crime by having the gun on campus and that she was treated unfairly by Nelson and Sablo. (Complaint, ¶ 3.32).

. . .

She also accuses Nelson and Sablo of "attempt[ing] to establish a gun registry where none existed" in violation of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6106 (Count 15). Plaintiff's state law claims are subject to dismissal based upon both the statute of limitations and the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

. . .

If you were to get nothing out of else this case (partially because it looks like Lewen went at it without an attorney), LEARN THIS:
There are limitations on time.

[streaker69]

I have a problem with this aspect:

She also accuses Nelson and Sablo of "attempt[ing] to establish a gun registry where none existed" in violation of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6106 (Count 15). Plaintiff's state law claims are subject to dismissal based upon both the statute of limitations and the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

It's already well known that people, especially people in authority THINK that there's gun registration in PA, but I don't think that their statement of having "unregistered" gun on campus is in effect an establishment of a gun registry. Especially considering they have no ability to do so.

[ChamberedRound]

Although I don't necessarily agree with it, I can understand the statute of limitations. But how could any of the named defendants fall under sovereign immunity, given that none of them are a state government per se?

One thing that is a problem to me for the plaintiff is that she signed the withdrawal. Based on the description it looks to be coerced, but it's possible she, or her lawyer if she had one, didn't raise that issue.

[Big Kahuna 19547]

[QUOTE=ChamberedRound;1779758]Although I don't necessarily agree with it, I can understand the statute of limitations. But how could any of the named defendants fall under sovereign immunity, given that none of them are a state government per se?

If they are acting in their official state employment capacity or in furtherance of the employer and/or under the "color of law" then they are the "state" and entitled to sovereign immunity.

[TaePo]

[QUOTE=Big Kahuna 19547;1779932]

Although I don't necessarily agree with it, I can understand the statute of limitations. But how could any of the named defendants fall under sovereign immunity, given that none of them are a state government per se?

If they are acting in their official state employment capacity or in furtherance of the employer and/or under the "color of law" then they are the "state" and entitled to sovereign immunity.

The question becomes if an entity supported in whole or in part by the state is actually an agent of the state or merely an entity that received some state support. I would assume the latter.

I hope the grad student learned a lesson that in some instances, one should dig in their heels. She probably would have been expelled anyway but what she did was not against the law. I haven't seen any reference to a state statute and a university or college of any type having state powers.

I don't know what the records would show, voluntarily left and not allowed on campus or if the expulsion for violation of firearm policy would look better...

Perhaps it will never even come up in other pursuits at other universities or jobs.

IANAL.

[PhilB]

I guess I'd like to know how it was revealed that this student had a firearm on campus, and whether she was in violation of a ban on firearms on campus. This legal action is only part of the whole story.

--Phil

[TaePo]

I guess I'd like to know how it was revealed that this student had a firearm on campus, and whether she was in violation of a ban on firearms on campus. This legal action is only part of the whole story.

--Phil

She apparently went to security to safely store the firearm while she was on campus. From there, it must have gone up the chain of command to head of security who then talked with campus officials. It probably snowballed from there.

Someone trying to do the right thing gets crucified. Imagine that.

[hzox221]

When I went to Edinboro 20 years ago, the policy was that you had to go immediately to the campus police office with a firearm, not to your dorm room first. They would store it in their safe and you could retrieve it anytime you were leaving campus. I stored both hunting and competition firearms there. The process was smooth and I had no complaints. But, if the campus police had to go and find her with a firearm on campus then she was in violation of the policy.

And FYI, Edinboro University has a police force not campus security. In recent years they have a cooporative agreement with the borough of Edinboro to support each other on law enforcement matters.

And for the record Dr. Sablo is a leftist POS.

[hzox221]

What happened to this case?

[MDJschool]

I don't have PACER access but a few folks around here do and maybe they could say by checking the docket. However, I see no more Pa.W.D. cases under the caption nor a 3rd.Cir. case under the caption in Google Scholar. Another Pa.W.D. case cited the Lewen opinion, but we aren't even given the facts of the complaint in this case:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...64334639991669
Lewen was pro se, you could always look her up and give her a call.