GERALD NOVAK; ADAM WENZEL v. WILLIAM L. FEDERSPIEL, in his official and personal capacities - Articles

All Content

GERALD NOVAK; ADAM WENZEL v. WILLIAM L. FEDERSPIEL, in his official and personal capacities

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jun 20, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Philip L. Ellison, OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL PLC, Hemlock, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Douglas J. Curlew, CUMMINGS, MCCLOREY, DAVIS & ACHO, P.L.C., Livonia, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Philip L. Ellison, OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL PLC, Hemlock, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Douglas J. Curlew, CUMMINGS, MCCLOREY, DAVIS & ACHO, P.L.C., Livonia, Michigan, for Appellee.

Judge(s): KETHLEDGE, LARSEN, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Bay City

PER CURIAM. Gerald Novak and Adam Wenzel claim they own fourteen firearms seized in a criminal investigation that ended years ago. Sheriff William Federspiel refused to turn the firearms over to Novak and Wenzel because he contends they have not proven that they own them. So they sued Federspiel under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and under Michigan law, asserting various federal constitutional claims and state constitutional and statutory claims. The district court granted summary judgment to Federspiel on all claims and denied Novak and Wenzel’s motion for partial summary judgment. The district court should have allowed Novak and Wenzel to proceed with their: (1) federal takings claims against Federspiel in his official capacity, (2) Second Amendment claims against Federspiel in his official capacity, and (3) state- law claim-and-delivery action. We thus affirm in part and vacate in part.

Attachments: