Recent Court Rulings

RSS

Facts: A resident sued the owner and the local housing authority for alleged wrongful termination of her Section 8 subsidy. In August 2008, the resident was notified that her unit failed a Housing Quality Standards (HQS) inspection. When she received this notification, she understood it to mean that if the housing authority stopped paying the Section 8 subsidy, it was due to the repair conditions in her unit. The resident claimed that, after the owner failed the 2008 HQS inspection, it failed to complete repairs.

Facts: Owners of a project-based Section 8 site sued HUD to challenge regulations that provide standards for “decent, safe, and sanitary” low-income housing. Under Section 8 of the Housing Act of 1937, HUD provides housing assistance through both “project-based assistance,” where HUD enters into contracts with property owners to subsidize designated dwellings, and “tenant-based assistance,” where HUD gives vouchers for tenant-selected dwellings.

Facts: In December 2007, a resident slipped and fell in front of the owner’s building while stepping up to the curb and onto a five- or six-inch mound of snow. The resident claimed that the owner was negligent in removing snow from the sidewalk.

The owner argued that according to all meteorological data, there couldn’t have been such an accumulation of snow and/or ice on that date, and, other than the resident’s testimony, there’s no independent admissible evidence to contradict the meteorological findings.

Facts: Under a housing assistance payments (HAP) contract with a site owner, a local PHA is barred from making a monthly Section 8 payment to the owner for a unit that doesn’t meet the minimum housing quality standards (HQS) established by federal law. During the inspection of one of the owner’s units on Oct.

Facts: A former resident sued the local PHA for evicting him and eliminating his contract for housing assistance without giving him proper notice. The resident argued that the PHA violated his due process rights because he didn’t receive adequate notice of the eviction proceedings. The notices all came back to the PHA as undeliverable. The PHA asked the court for a judgment in its favor without a trial.

Ruling: A South Carolina district court granted the PHA’s request and dismissed the resident’s claims.

Facts: An 84-year-old resident living in a one-bedroom unit submitted a request to the local PHA for a larger unit, along with a doctor’s verification indicating that the small size of her unit had created stress that contributed to her poor health. The PHA denied her request.

Facts: A PHA sent an owner a letter notifying her that various conditions needed to be repaired, and verified as repaired, within 30 days, or her Section 8 subsidy would terminate. The letter also notified the owner that she might be entitled to reimbursement for some or all of the suspended subsidy if she could establish that the majority of the violations were caused by the resident, or that access for repairs was delayed by the resident. To seek such reimbursement, the letter gave the owner a number to call within 30 days to discuss the policy requirements.

Facts: In 1974, a group of residents sued the Toledo Metropolitan Housing Authority and HUD for segregating minorities from non-minorities when building and doling out housing. At the time, the court ruled for the residents and ordered adherence to an Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) designed to correct these practices and undo their effects. Recently, the lead resident in that case asked the court to modify the AAP to address the changed realities that the PHA and HUD face today.

Facts: A disabled resident sued the owner and management of a low-income senior housing site for discrimination and retaliation. After receiving an announcement that the site was opening its Section 8 waiting list, the resident completed an application for the Section 8 housing. He claimed he got a letter from the assistant manager stating that his name was next on the list for Section 8 rental assistance and that there was one Section 8 studio apartment available.

Facts: A Section 8 resident signed a one-year lease, which required her to pay a security deposit and $465 each month. Shortly after moving in, the resident thought she heard bats in the walls of her unit.  She began to run the water for extended periods of time, including overnight, in an effort to scare the bats away. Also, at about the same time, the resident found the heat in her unit inadequate. To increase the heat, she turned on her gas stove and opened the oven door.