Lemad Corporation v. Neil Calfee

MEMORANDUM

Lemad Corporation appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Defendants, City of Tempe and the City’s Community Development Manager Neil Calfee, in its 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. Le-mad asserts the district court erred when it held that Lemad did not have a constitutionally protected property interest in its due process claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

Lemad argues that the Defendants deprived it of the fair market value of its property. Although Lemad does not assert a Takings Clause claim, it contends that the City’s Redevelopment Plan created a process whereby Lemad was unable to sell its property at fair market value due to Calfee’s interference with potential contracts with third party purchasers.

Defendants’ process did not deprive Le-mad of a constitutionally protected right. The purported injuries caused by Calfee’s alleged disparaging remarks about the Le-mad property and its owner are not constitutionally protected interests guaranteed against state deprivation without due process of law. See Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693, 712 , 96 S.Ct. 1155 , 47 L.Ed.2d 405 (1976) (holding that an individual’s reputation, by…