Recent Court Rulings

RSS

Facts: Ignoring repeated written warnings, a resident continued to smoke in her Section 8 unit and allow her guests to do likewise. And while the multiple complaints from neighbors about her screaming did little to gain the owner’s affections, the last straw was her arrest for attacking a police officer. After a hearing, the PHA concluded that there were grounds to evict her for engaging in violent criminal activity and repeatedly violating the “Smoke-Free Community” addendum of her lease. The resident appealed.

Facts: An owner claimed that over a course of four years, a Section 8 resident was a major nuisance, harassing the neighbors, stealing packages, making excessive noise, and getting into fights. But all the while it accepted her rent. In November 2018, she was arrested on the premises and charged with felony assault and criminal possession of a weapon. A month later, the owner recertified her lease for another year. But in April 2019, the owner sent the resident an eviction notice for disturbing her neighbors and engaging in criminal activity in violation of her lease.

Facts: A few months after a resident moved into his apartment, his next-door neighbor began a relentless campaign of racial harassment, abuse, and threats. From the start of his neighbor’s several-month campaign of harassment, the resident, “fear[ing] for his personal safety,” contacted the police and the owner to complain. His first call to the police prompted the county’s Police Hate Crimes Unit officers to visit the site, interview witnesses, and warn the neighbor to stop threatening the resident with racial epithets.

Facts: Before a resident moved into her unit, a new smoke detector with a new battery was installed. The unit was also inspected by a local PHA inspector who found that the unit had the correct number of smoke detectors and that the smoke detectors were working properly. Shortly after the resident moved in, she complained that her smoke detector was constantly sounding and asked the owner how to turn it off. The resident testified that she removed the smoke detector from the wall and put it in the hall closet, but she didn’t remove the battery.  

Facts: After the death of a Section 8 resident, an owner sought to evict a person living in the unit. The occupant claimed succession rights and tried to prove that he lived with the tenant for more than a year before she died from cancer, and that they were involved in an emotionally and financially committed nontraditional family relationship, thus entitling him to succeed to the lease for the unit. The occupant asked the owner to provide:

Facts: A former Section 8 resident sued the local PHA and an owner for alleged housing discrimination and breach of contract. The resident claimed that after making written promises to transfer the resident to a new unit free of dangerous inhalants, the owner refused to deliver keys to the new unit.

The resident had sought medical assistance for shortness of breath, which she believed was caused by mold in her unit. She was advised by a doctor not to return to her unit until an independent inspection had been performed to determine the presence of mold.

Facts: A resident was terminated from the Section 8 program after the PHA investigated her marital status. The resulting report concluded that she was married and didn’t provide true and correct information about her marital status on two annual questionnaires. The PHA notified her that it was terminating her from the Section 8 program on the grounds of fraud and failure to report her marriage to an individual who “was residing at the Section 8 unit.”

Facts: A local PHA sued its former accountants, seeking to recover losses from their alleged negligent failure to detect the fraudulent conduct of its former executive director and former finance director. The former executive director’s employment agreements established his annual salary at $107,000 for the 2001 fiscal year. The PHA was required to submit annual budget reports to the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) for approval, subject to regulatory limits on the amount by which a PHA could increase administrative salaries.

Facts: A local PHA sent a resident a notice of the termination of her participation in the Section 8 program. The PHA claimed that the resident improperly permitted an unauthorized occupant to reside with her and this occupant violated the rule against criminal activity by committing the crimes of terroristic threats, harassment, and disorderly conduct. The resident requested a hearing to challenge the PHA’s decision.

Facts: An owner sued the city over a new law that bars owners from screening out prospective tenants who use Section 8 vouchers. Under the new rules, owners can screen prospective renters but can no longer stipulate that Section 8 tenants aren’t allowed. The ordinance grants reprieve for landlords who can show compliance would create an “undue hardship,” though only after a discrimination claim is filed with the city’s Civil Rights Department.