Jerolyn Sackman v. City of Los Angeles, 677 F. App'x 365

Plaintiff Jerolyn Crute Sackman was cited and her vehicle impounded under the City of Los Angeles ordinance prohibiting parking in the same public-street spot for 72 hours.
Sackman sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of substantive and procedural due process for enforcement absent posted signs and prior notice.
The district court dismissed her § 1983 claim with prejudice; Sackman appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
The Ninth Circuit reviewed the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal de novo and affirmed the dismissal.
Court treated the 72-hour rule as regulating an economic/property interest (not a fundamental right) and applied rational-basis review to the substantive due process claim.
For procedural due process, the court found statutory publication plus a citation attached two days before towing and administrative/judicial review procedures satisfied due process; requiring posted signs would impose substantial burdens on the City.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Substantive due process: does the 72-hour law violate substantive due process?	Sackman argued enforcement deprived her of a protected interest without adequate justification (claimed fundamental rights implicated).	City argued the law regulates an economic/property interest, so rational-basis review applies and the law furthers legitimate objectives (prevent monopolizing spaces, abandonments).	Court held no fundamental right implicated; applied rational basis and found ordinance rationally related to legitimate goals—claim fails.
Procedural due process: was notice (posted signs, pre-tow notice) required before citation/towing?	Sackman argued lack of posted signs and insufficient pre-tow notice violated due process.	City argued legislative publication and the statute suffice; it provided added notice by attaching a citation two days before towing; administrative and judicial review mitigate erroneous deprivation.	Court held statute publication plus the citation and available hearings satisfied due process; requirement of posted signs not constitutionally mandated here.

Ebner v. Fresh, Inc., 838 F.3d 958 (9th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal)
Lone Star Sec. & Video, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 584 F.3d 1232 (9th Cir. 2009) (statutory publication can satisfy notice; parking regulation affects property/economic interest)
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (1985) (rational-basis framework when fundamental rights are not implicated)
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) (procedural due process balancing test)