A federal appeals court has rejected all civil rights claims brought by the owners of an Omaha apartment complex against city officials over a 2018 building closure.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued its decision on Friday, November 6, 2026. The ruling upholds a lower District of Nebraska dismissal of a lawsuit filed by AB Realty, LLC, along with property owners Kay and Janea Anderson.
Court Dismisses Fourth Amendment Claims
The legal battle stems from a 2018 inspection when Omaha housing inspectors executed a search warrant at the Yale Park Apartment Complex. Officials reported severe health and safety hazards that led to the displacement of tenants.
Following extensive renovations, AB Realty reopened the 60-unit property in 2021. The company subsequently sued the city, housing advocates, and housing inspectors Scott Lane and Kevin Mulcahy under Section 1983, alleging violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
Writing for a unanimous panel, Circuit Judge L. Steven Kobes found that the property owners failed to establish any constitutional violations. The court determined that the initial search warrant maintained sufficient evidentiary support even after contesting disputed statements.
Even excluding the information disputed by AB Realty, the warrant application established probable cause for the inspection warrant,
the court wrote in its decision, according to a report by the Times of India.
Deficiencies in Due Process and Takings Claims
The appeals panel also dismissed claims tied to due process and government takings. The property owners argued that officials erred by closing the entire complex rather than individual units, posting improper warning signs, delaying repair approvals, and making negative remarks.
The court characterized these arguments as scattershot allegations that failed to identify specific responsible officials or violated rights. The judges noted that the city never seized the land for public use, invalidating the Fifth Amendment takings claim.
Docketed under number 25-2082, the ruling concludes years of litigation that included prior misdemeanor convictions for Kay Anderson in state court. With no underlying constitutional violation established, the civil lawsuit is now officially closed.
