Recent Court Rulings

RSS

Facts: For more than a decade, a city had been attempting to condemn two buildings on an assisted site. In 2005, the city filed a condemnation action, and the owner argued that its buildings aren’t dilapidated and that the city’s suit should be rejected on that ground, and on the further ground that razing the buildings would have a disparate impact on its predominantly black tenants, in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

Facts: A Section 8 resident sued the local PHA for discrimination and defamation. In May 2015, the resident started a food truck business with a financial partner who agreed to finance the venture. Anticipating the start of his business, the resident inquired at his annual income certification meeting about the proper way to report the food truck to the PHA. According to his senior housing specialist, he would need to report the business only when he started to receive an income from it.

Facts: A salary scandal involving a local PHA official led to a criminal investigation that exposed an alleged conspiracy to rig HUD site inspections. A trial court convicted the PHA’s director of modernization and the PHA’s paid consultant for “knowingly and unlawfully” conspiring to defraud the United States and its agency, HUD, a violation of 18 U.S.C.

Facts: A PHA employee who served as a maintenance manager filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against the PHA’s director. In June 1990, the employee was hired by the PHA and worked as a maintenance manager until his termination in March 2007. The employee claimed that his employment was uneventful, with no performance issues or disciplinary action, until early 2007. At that time, HUD placed the PHA in receivership and appointed the director to supervise daily operations.

Facts: Residents sued a Section 8 project owner in state court for discrimination under the theory of disparate impact liability. The owner decided not to renew participation in the project-based Section 8 subsidy program when it expired. Instead of continuing the project-based subsidy, the owner opted to accept Section 8 enhanced vouchers from the tenants, which enables the residents to continue living at the site with a rental subsidy.

Facts: A resident sued the local PHA for injuries she suffered while preparing a meal in her kitchen. At the time, a grease fire started. While the fire was shooting up to the hood of the stove, the resident grabbed the fire extinguisher that was on the floor of her kitchen, pumped it twice, and sprayed the fire. When doing so, the fire escalated. As a result, the oil from the pan sprayed the resident on her face and body, causing her injuries.

Facts: A resident sued a local PHA for allegedly improperly terminating his Section 8 housing benefits. The resident was authorized to rent a two-bedroom unit, with one bedroom for himself and one bedroom for his adult daughter who was his authorized in-home services aide.

Facts: A resident who lived in a one-bedroom apartment was diagnosed with advanced dementia in 2009. Her disability rendered her mentally unstable and incapable of living alone, as noted in medical records submitted to the housing manager and at a housing authority hearing. These notes indicated that it was “unsafe” for the resident “to live on her own,” and that she needed “to be under constant supervision.”

Facts: Two days after being refused entry into a resident’s unit, a site manager mailed the resident a letter informing him that his refusal to consent to entry for inspection and repairs violated his lease. The resident replied with a letter suggesting that actual ownership of the building was in doubt because of fraud relating to its purchase.

The manager then wrote and hand-delivered a letter informing the resident that his lease was terminated and that he had until March 31 to vacate the unit under the lease’s 60-day notice provision.

Facts: A Section 8 resident suspected that new site management was responsible for a decline in the maintenance of the units. He openly complained about the condition of the units to the management, other residents, and eventually the local PHA.