Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)

Citation: Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)
Parent Document: Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2010-09-01
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/174536/gallagher-v-magner-ex-rel-city-o... ↗

Full Text

1,044 chars

Appellants in Case No. 09-1209 (“the Gallagher Appellants”) appeal the
dismissal of their substantive due process claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We
interpret their claim as challenging the City’s Housing Code enforcement as applied
to them, not as a facial challenge to any policy or practice. “[T]he theory of
substantive due process is properly reserved for truly egregious and extraordinary
cases.” Myers v. Scott County, 868 F.2d 1017, 1018 (8th Cir. 1989). To prevail on
this claim, the Gallagher Appellants must show “a constitutionally protected property
interest and that [City] officials used their power in such an arbitrary and oppressive
way that it ‘shocks the conscience.’” Entergy, Ark., Inc. v. Nebraska, 241 F.3d 979,
991 (8th Cir. 2001) (quoting County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 845–46
(1998)). In light of the uncontested legitimate goals of enforcing the Housing Code,
there is insufficient evidence to reasonably conclude that this is a “truly egregious and
extraordinary” example of government regulation.

Other Sections in This Document (106)

Full Text