Chaffin v. Portland Metropolitan Area Boundary Com'n

62 F.3d 1423 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Richard L. CHAFFIN; Robert M. Clue; Clarence Bradford; John Campbell; John Luce; and John Moreland, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION; City of Portland, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-36124. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 13, 1995. Decided Aug. 4, 1995. 1 Before: HUG and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges, and SCHWARZER, * District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Plaintiffs brought a section 1983 action alleging that their properties were annexed into the City of Portland in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the City of Portland and the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission, and plaintiffs appeal. 4 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . After de novo review, we affirm the district court's grant of…