Court Opinion

ID: 3064202
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-14 21:21:29.027418+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:38:20.633970
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
 

  Appellant Dixon seeks reversal of a judgment dismissing his claim for damages resulting from the entrance upon, inspection of, and ultimate demolition of a building on his property.
 

  After extensive and somewhat troublesome litigation and the creation of an extensive record, the district court determined that appellant had been afforded full process insofar as the determination of the unsafe conditions of his building was concerned and that this process included sufficient evidence to support that determination.
 

  Appellant had also asserted a claim for damages because the inspector had entered his premises without consent or warrant, a violation of the Fourth Amendment. After the district court had entered the order referred to above to dismiss the action, appellant moved for relief from and vacation of that order due to the Fourth Amendment claim. In a detailed analysis of the record, the district court concluded that the inspection, if it occurred as described, had taken place more than four years prior to the action, so the statute of limitations had run and the claim is time-barred.
 

  Our review of these two orders and the extensive record upon which they are based demonstrates that the district court correctly analyzed the situation and that the orders were correctly and lawfully entered. The judgment of the district court is
 

  AFFIRMED.