PARKSLEY, Va. - A federal judge has ruled that a small Eastern Shore town likely violated the constitutional rights of a local food truck couple, finding evidence officials retaliated against them for speaking out and challenging a town policy.
In a detailed order filed on March 31 and involving Parksley food truck owners Theslet Benoir and Clemene Bastien, the court said it found substantial evidence of unconstitutional retaliation, including actions that appeared aimed at shutting down their business after they criticized the town and sought legal help.
Tuesday’s ruling now allows key claims in Benoir’s and Bastien’s lawsuit against Parksley to move forward.
The dispute dates to spring 2023, when the couple opened what was believed to be Parksley’s first food truck with a town permit. Tensions followed, including allegations a councilmember harassed them and admitted to cutting the truck’s water line, disrupting operations.
In October 2023, the town passed a food truck ban. While the mayor initially said the couple could operate until their permit expired in May 2024, that stance appeared to shift after the couple spoke to WBOC and other media outlets. Court filings say town leaders quickly moved to enforce the ban, directing a cease-and-desist letter and warning of possible criminal penalties.
By early November 2023, the couple faced threats of daily fines and potential jail time, according to court documents. Around then, the Institute for Justice intervened, challenging the food truck ban’s legality. Internal communications later showed the town’s own attorney had concerns about the ordinance’s constitutionality. Fearing prosecution, the couple shut down and filed a federal lawsuit in January 2024, alleging First Amendment retaliation, due process violations, and property damage tied to the water line incident.
Documents added to the case in 2025 further suggested officials knew of potential legal issues but proceeded with enforcement soon after the couple spoke publicly, timing that the judge said could support a retaliation claim.
In Tuesday’s order, the judge said that sequence, along with alleged conduct by officials, could lead a reasonable jury to find the couple’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated. The court emphasized that even small-town governments cannot use their authority to silence critics or punish residents for seeking legal recourse.
The judge did dismiss Benoir’s and Bastien’s claim Parksley violated their First Amendment rights, however.
“Although Judge Allen agreed that the town intended to retaliate against them for their speech, she found that a separate part of the code independently barred food trucks, so Judge Allen did not award damages for the First Amendment retaliation, only for the Fourth Amendment and Virginia law violations,” Benoir’s and Bastien’s attorneys said in a press release on March 31.
The case now moves forward toward further proceedings or trial unless settled. While Tuesday’s ruling does not resolve the case, the order makes clear the allegations raise serious constitutional concerns.