01-3596 Hickey v. O'Bannon, et al.

Listen to this article

“Here, the appellants failed to plead facts that, if true, state a constitutional or section 1983 violation as a matter of law. Accepting all facts therein as true, the most liberal reading of the appellants’ complaint reveals only that the Board failed to comply with procedural rules for conducting administrative hearings as provided by state statute. That is an insufficient basis on which to state a federal due process claim… Indeed, the appellants did receive all the due process to which they were constitutionally entitled; namely, notice and the opportunity to be heard.

“Moreover, the appellants have already sought and won relief pursuant to state statute for the procedural deprivations of which they complain. Cf. Pro-Eco, Inc., 57 F.3d at 514 (noting that plaintiff had already received relief for the defendant’s violation of a state procedural statute in the form of invalidation of the subject ordinance when ruling that state procedural violation did not offend the United States Constitution). As noted by the district court, the appellants are simply not entitled to more procedure than this under federal law.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Sharp, J., Bauer, J.