Bivens et al. v Salt Lake City Corporation

Bivens appealed the dismissal of his putative class action unjust enrichment and due process claims against City arising from collection of parking fines. The Court affirmed. It held that while the parking tickets issued here contained troubling misstatements, it provided sufficient notice as there is no allegation that the wrong 10 day period to challenge prejudiced anyone, read as a whole the ticket informed the cited person of the paths to challenge the ticket and provide contact information to obtain more information which has been held to given sufficient notice by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and the omission of the right to challenge the ticket in justice court is irrelevant here as there is no indication anyone was induced to not challenge a ticket. It held that the small claims court notice issued here was adequate despite misstatements as the emphasis non the consequences of not winning the challenge did not undermine the right to a hearing and the notice did not in fact prevent Bivens and others wanted to make, namely City effectively made nonpayment for parking legal by replacing single meter machines with multispace machines without changing the city code to reflect the change in machines, and in any event the $15 fine here is not a high stakes penalty requiring more notice. It finally held that the unjust enrichment claim, including a claim for attorney fees, failed as a matter of law as Bivens had adequate notice and an adequate forum yet only one of the tickets identified in the complaint was challenged and that challenge was successful and thus the plaintiffs here failed to exhaust an adequate remedy and cannot bring what is effectively a collateral attack on the judgments in the underlying parking ticket cases.