porno porno izle sikis

Park Village Apartment Tenants Ass’n v. Mortimer Howard Trust

No. C 06-7389 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2007) (order granting preliminary injunction), (N.D. Cal. July 16, 2008).

Current residents of Oakland project-based Section 8 property seek to prevent the owner from raising rents or evicting residents because the owner failed to provide the required notice under federal and state law prior to the non-renewal of the HAP contract.

District Court's Order Granting Summary Judgment on Federal Notice Claim (PDF)

Park Village Tenants' Motion for Summary Judgment (PDF)

Ninth Circuit's Memorandum Decision Affirming Preliminary Injunction (PDF)

Order Granting Park Village Tenants' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PDF)

The court grants Park Village’s motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining the owner from raising rents and evicting tenants, because the owner failed to provide proper notice that the HAP contract was going to expire. The owner was obligated to provide notice under federal law because the expiration of a HAP contract triggers notice requirements. Notices provided by the owner failed to meet statutory and HUD guidelines because they lacked required language, did not sufficiently show the owner’s intent and were not given one year in advance. The court did not consider the state notice requirements. This decision was been appealed to the 9th Circuit, which affirmed in an unpublished memorandum.

Park Village Tenants' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PDF)

* Owner did not satisfy federal and regulatory notice requirements

o Owner did not provide notice one year before the contract expiration as required by federal law
o The notices provided by the owner do not include the statements required under federal and state law.

* Tenants would suffer irreparable injury without preliminary injunctive relief
* Exhibits attached.

Park Village Tenants' Proposed Order for Preliminary Injunction and Notice of Related Case (PDF)

City of Oakland's Motion to Remand Complaint (PDF)

* The district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claims alleged in the City’s complaint because it does not contain any federal claims

City of Oakland's Complaint (PDF)

Claims include:

* Owner failed to provide notice to the City one year prior, as well as six months prior, to the date of termination of a subsidy contract
* Owner failed to provide notice to the City of the opportunity to submit an offer to purchase the property
* Owner has endeavored to recover possession from tenants without lawful grounds.

Park Village Tenants' Complaint (PDF)

Claims include:

* Owner failed to provide one-year written notice of the nonrenewal of the HAP contract as required by federal statute and HUD guidelines.
* Owner attempted to increase tenants’ rent and evict them from their homes.
* Owner failed to provide notice under CA state law.

ankara escort istanbul escort bayan
ankara escort istanbul escort bayan