This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
So, we affirm the district court on the issue he did appeal, the order granting summary
judgment on Fox’s inverse condemnation claim.
I.
A.
Fox, an active-duty serviceman with the United States Navy, bought 615 Waker
Avenue in Norfolk in June 2015.2 The Navy deployed Fox in the Fall of 2016. In
December, the city inspected the house at 615 Walker Avenue. It found several Uniform
Statewide Building Code violations which rendered the property “unsafe or unfit for human
habitation or use . . . .” J.A. 963–66. As a result, the city mailed a notice of those violations
to Fox at the P.O. box address on file with the city’s tax assessor. But the notices were
returned to sender. In addition to mailing notices, City Inspector Christina Jackson
physically posted a notice of violations to the house itself in December 2016.
The city prepared another round of notices dated February 1, 2017. These notices
described the property as “unsafe and uninhabitable.” The record does not confirm whether
the city ever mailed them. It does, however, confirm the city mailed a letter in May 2017
informing Fox that he had not made sufficient progress repairing the property. This letter,
2
Because we are reviewing the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the
city, we present the facts, as we must, in the light most favorable to Fox. See Bhattacharya
v. Murray, 93 F.4th 675, 686 (4th Cir. 2024).
5Jump to an indexed page (18 of 18)