February 3, 2025

Ocean Springs Property Owners Will Appeal Dismissal of Lawsuit

Federal lawsuit seeks to end Mississippi government’s ability to secretly label property as “slum or blighted.”

Faye Payton stands in front of her family's home in Ocean Springs.
Faye Payton stands in front of her family's home in Ocean Springs.

GULFPORT, Miss.—Late Friday, a federal district court dismissed a lawsuit from Ocean Springs property owners who had their homes and businesses labeled by the city as slum and blighted, without notice and without the ability to appeal. Much of Ocean Springs’ historically Black district, with homes handed down from generation to generation, was targeted in a 2023 redevelopment plan. Owners of homes and businesses and a church sued with the Institute for Justice (IJ).

“The city didn’t tell us about the slum and blight last time. Why would they tell us next time?” said Faye Payton, whose family owns a home on Cash Alley. “This fight is not over yet, and we shall not be moved.”

U.S. District Judge Taylor McNeel granted the city’s motion to dismiss but also rejected the city’s claim that the case was moot after the city rescinded the slum and blight designation. The judge concluded that the city’s action was a legislative action that did not require notice or could be reviewed by courts.

“Mississippi governments cannot brand neighborhoods as slums in secret,” said IJ Senior Vice President and Litigation Director Dana Berliner. “Obviously telling a person about something when it’s too late to do anything is not the meaningful opportunity to be heard that the U.S. Constitution’s Due Process Clause requires.”

A slum and blight label allows cities to take property by eminent domain, and the only opportunity to challenge that label is 10 days after the city labels it. But without any notice, the owners learned about the label months later—far too late to appeal the designation.

The court was persuaded by the fact that, although they could no longer challenge slum and blight (the strongest defense against eminent domain), they could still bring other (weaker) defenses.

“The fact that they can bring some other, weaker opposition to the taking of their property is cold comfort to owners who want to keep their homes, businesses, and churches,” said IJ Attorney Suranjan Sen.

Share

More on Private Property

Charles and Eli Copley hold hands walking a wooded trail on their Roxbury, Connecticut property

Private Property

Connecticut Couple Demands Clarity After Town Threatens to Ban Them From Allowing Hikers on Their Property

Dan King · August 27, 2026

Leonard Hoffmann is a North Dakota property owner fighting for fair compensation for property taken by a pipeline company through eminent domain.

Private Property

Support Pours in for Ranchers’ Supreme Court Battle with Pipeline Company Wielding Eminent Domain Power

Andrew Wimer · August 26, 2026

Joe Marino stands with arms crossed in front of white fence and cornfield at his family's New Jersey home

Private Property

Former Attorneys General, Business Associations, and Former Department of Labor Leaders Support Family Farm’s Supreme Court Case

Andrew Wimer · August 5, 2026