Clifton Jackson; Helen Noel; William Noel Plaintiffs— v. City of Jackson, Mississippi Defendant—
June 2, 2026·25-60216·Published·Stephen A. Higginson·By Aisha Johnson
The Fifth Circuit vacated the district court's dismissal for lack of standing, finding that plaintiffs alleged a concrete economic injury from paying for unusable water. However, the court affirmed the dismissal for failure to state a claim, ruling that plaintiffs failed to allege constitutionally inadequate process for their billing disputes.
Background
Plaintiffs, customers of the City of Jackson water utility, sued the City alleging procedural due process violations under Section nineteen eighty-three and a state law breach of contract claim due to systemic water failures, billing errors, and inadequate administrative remedies. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of standing and failure to state a claim, denying leave to amend as futile.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that while the plaintiffs’ alleged economic injury from purchasing bottled water satisfied the standing requirements, their procedural due process claim failed. The court found that the plaintiffs did not adequately plead that the City’s administrative process was deficient, noting that they received notice and participated in hearings where they obtained relief for billing errors. The court determined that the plaintiffs failed to identify a process deprivation distinct from their success in a billing dispute.
What it means going forward
The ruling allows similar plaintiffs to bring standing-based challenges regarding economic injuries from utility failures but reinforces that plaintiffs must specifically allege deficiencies in administrative procedures to succeed on due process claims.
