Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-20399/USCOURTS-ca5-15-20399-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Board of Adjustment of the City of Spring Valley Village, Texas
Appellee
City of Spring Valley Village, Texas
Appellee
Art Flores
Appellee
Glen Sumner
Appellant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-20399

Summary Calendar

GLEN SUMNER, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SPRING VALLEY VILLAGE, 

TEXAS; CITY OF SPRING VALLEY VILLAGE, TEXAS; ART FLORES, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15-CV-244

Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Glen Sumner appeals the district court’s dismissal of his action, 

stemming from the alleged eroding of his property due to the actions of his 

neighbor and the City of Spring Valley Village, Texas. In the district court, 

Sumner asserted a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of his procedural 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 1, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-20399 Document: 00513402332 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/01/2016
No. 15-20399

2

due process rights, and further sought a declaratory judgment that the 

certificate of occupancy issued by the city to his neighbor be withdrawn. 

Sumner first urges this court to find that the district court erred in ruling 

that he failed to state a protected property or liberty interest to support his 

procedural due process claim. He further contends that the district court’s 

determination that his declaratory judgment claim was unsupported by an 

independent basis for federal jurisdiction was also error. 

This court has considered this appeal on the basis of the briefs, the 

pertinent portions of the record, and the applicable law. Having done so, the 

judgment is affirmed, essentially for the reasons stated in the Order of the 

district court. 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 15-20399 Document: 00513402332 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/01/2016