United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit December 15, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10972
IRMA JEAN JAMES and TERRI LARY,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
VERSUS
CITY OF DALLAS TEXAS; ET AL,
Defendants,
CITY OF DALLAS TEXAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division
(3:98-CV-436-R)
Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellee Irma Jean James brought suit on behalf of a certified
class against Appellant City of Dallas (the “City”) and Aquila
Allen, a former administrator of the City’s Urban Rehabilitation
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Standards Board (“URSB”), seeking damages based on the City’s order
of demolition of a building James owned and injunctive relief
related primarily to the lien the City imposed on the property to
secure the cost of such demolition. James subsequently amended her
complaint several times, eventually non-suiting her claim against
Allen, adding plaintiff Terri Lary, and adding the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) as a defendant.
James and Lary (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) also sought
certification of two classes under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(b)(2). After
conducting a hearing on Plaintiffs’ proposed class certifications
in October 1999, the district court entered an order certifying two
classes under Rule 23(b)(2), one of which was based on due process
claims and the other on racial discrimination grounds. The City
appealed the district court’s certification determinations.
A panel of this Court modified the number of claims for which
the Plaintiffs could potentially recover under the due process
class and concluded that Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate Article
III standing to seek the relief requested for the race
discrimination class. James v. City of Dallas, 254 F.3d 551, 573
(5th Cir. 2001) (“James I”). The court in James I determined that
the due process class could seek potentially available injunctive
relief on seven of their original twelve requests: “(1) cancel the
debt assessed for demolition costs and associated fees/interest and
file notice in the public deed records that the debt was cancelled,
(2) file a release of the lien in the public deed records, (3)
2
ensure that title is clear on the property, (4) ensure that all
City records concerning the property show the debt cancelled, (5)
refrain from taking any steps to enforce the lien or collect the
debt, (6) refrain from foreclosures based on demolition liens, and
(7) refrain from retaliatory action such as refusing to issue
building permits.” Id. at 564 n.10.
On remand, the district court bifurcated the due process class
issues for a bench trial (over the City’s objection), leaving the
claims seeking individual money damages for a jury trial. The
district court tried the due process claims without a jury on
December 9, 2002. In August 2003, the district court entered its
findings of fact and conclusions of law, ordering a permanent
injunction against the City on the due process claims. James v.
City of Dallas, No. 3:98-CV-436-R, 2003 WL 22342799 (N.D. Tex. Aug.
28, 2003) (“James II”). The City timely filed the instant appeal.
Having carefully reviewed the entire record of this case, and
having fully considered the parties’ respective briefing and
arguments, we find no reversible error in the district court’s
findings of fact and conclusions of law. We therefore AFFIRM the
final judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons
stated in its order.
AFFIRMED.
3