Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Revell v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

598 F.3d 128 (2010)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...

Revell v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

598 F.3d 128 (2010)

Facts

Gregg Revell (plaintiff) booked a flight from Utah to Pennsylvania. At the airport in Utah, Revell declared that he was carrying an unloaded firearm and ammunition in separate cases, for which he obtained the proper tag. The itinerary included a connecting flight to New Jersey, which was late. Revell therefore could not fly to Pennsylvania until the following day. Revell retrieved his luggage, including the firearm and ammunition, and took a bus to a nearby hotel, where he spent the night. The next morning, Revell returned to the airport, where a Transportation Security Administration agent flagged Revell’s luggage. Revell was escorted to an interrogation area, where several officers of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority) (defendant) questioned him. Scott Ericson (defendant), a Port Authority officer, arrested Revell for violation of New Jersey laws regulating the interstate transportation of firearms. Revell, who did not take advantage of procedural protections available in the state, was incarcerated for three days. Although the charges were later dropped, it took more than two years for the state to return Revell’s firearm and ammunition. Revell filed suit against Ericson and the Port Authority in federal district court. Revell cited § 926A of the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA), which provided that a firearm owner could transport a firearm from one state through a second state to a third state if (1) the firearm owner was licensed to carry the firearm in the first and third states and (2) the firearm was not readily accessible or directly accessible from a transporting vehicle in the second state. Revell made the related argument that his § 926A right gave him a valid right under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Finally, Revell argued that the arrest violated his due-process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court dismissed the § 926A claim and granted summary judgment against Revell on the constitutional claims. Revell appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Jordan, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 617,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,400 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership