Plaintiffs live in a development one and one half miles north of a sportsman’s club and they had previously complained of stray bullets reaching their neighborhood and striking their homes in 2006.  The Club subsequently made changes to the firing range and reopened in late 2008. The plaintiffs brought suit alleging that the Town “invited and encouraged” families to live in the subdivision “by zoning it for single-family residential use even though the Club was near the subdivision that would be developed after the zoning change.”  The plaintiffs further alleged that the Club functions on behalf of the Town since the Town purchases memberships for its police officers at the Club and uses it as the town police firing range, and that therefore the Town failed to take action against the Club.     

The Court found the Town did not violate the plaintiff’s due process rights by contributing to a danger.  The Court held that “mere zoning by the government” is not enough to violate due process as the zoning decision to allow residential homes to be constructed some distance from the Club and any injury was the result of the Club as a private actor and not direct activity by the Town.  

In response to the argument that the Town failed to take action against the Club, the court held the plaintiffs did not establish a genuine issue of material fact as to “any state-created danger” as the police had investigated “bullet strike[s] at the home of a non-party in 2006 and ha[d] an open public safety investigation into general firearm incidents reported in Wolf Ridge Gap.”  The court also held the “use of the Club by certain police officers” did not violate the Due Process Clause.

The Court also refuted the Plaintiff’s argument that they were induced to buy homes when the Town zoned the neighborhood, holding that the “Town did not have any knowledge at the time of the zoning of who would purchase property in the area” or of the harm that could occur to the houses. 

The court dismissed the constitutional claims but remanded the matter to the State court to hear the plaintiff’s nuisance claim against the Club.

Hespeler v. Town of Ledyard, 2009 WL 3128536 (D. Conn. 9/28/2009).