porno porno izle sikis

People to End Homelessness v. Martinez

D. R.I., March 29, 2001) (Order on Motion to Dismiss), aff'd 339 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2003)
Summary: (Develco)
Plaintiffs challenge HUD's approval of Section 8 opt out and provision of enhanced vouchers under Administrative Procedures Act based on notices that do not comply with state and federal statutes, and failure to affirmatively further fair housing under 42 U.S.C. § 3608(e). The District Court dismissed all claims against HUD, and partially dismissed claims against the Owner. On plaintiffs appeal to the First Circuit, court upheld lower court's judgment, finding that HUD acted consistently with governing statutes in issuing enhanced vouchers despite deficient opt-out notices.

First Circuit Opinion (PDF)

This description will appear on the site in the document list page.

Motion for Permission to Provide Additional Authority (DOC)

Appellants' Opening Brief on Appeal to the First Circuit (DOC)

Memo on Mortgage Sales and HUD's Discretionary Authority in Property Disposition Sales (DOC)

This is a portion of a litigation memo presenting arguments why HUD does not have unfettered discretion in its administration of mortgage sales.

District Court Opinion on Motion to Dismiss, March 29, 2002 (PDF)

Rhode Island Preservation Statute (PDF)

Declaration of Catherine L. Rhodes (PDF)

Declaration of director of housing advocacy organzation in support of motion on temporary restraining order.

Memo in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (PDF)

* Plaintiff has shown a likelihood of success on the merits and the balance of hardship tips in their favor.

o Defendant Owners Have Not Complied with State and Federal Law Governing Section 8 Opt Out Notices.
o By Issuing Defective Notices, the Defendant Owners Have Interfered with Plaintiffs’ Efforts to Obtain Enhanced Voucher Rent Subsidies.
o Defendant Martinez Has Failed to Ascertain Whether Federal and State Notice Requirements Have Been Complied With.
o Defendant Martinez Has Failed to Prohibit the Owners from Interfering With Tenants’ Efforts to Obtain Rent Subsidies.
o The Decisions of Defendant Martinez to Permit the Owners to Withdraw the Properties from the Federal Housing Programs were Undertaken Without any Consideration of the Racial and Socio-Economic Impact of These Actions in Violation of HUD’s Affirmative Duties Under the Fair Housing Act.

* The Bond Requirement Should be Waived because Plaintiffs are Indigent and Bring this Action in the Public Interest.

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (PDF)

Amended Complaint (PDF)

* Violation of Federal Notice Requirements Governing Termination of Section 8 Contracts; 42 U.S.C. § 1437f.
* Violation of Section 202 of the Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, as amended; 12 U.S.C. § 1715z-1b.
* Violation of Rhode Island Opt-Out Notice Requirements; R.I.G.L. § 34-45-1 et seq.
* Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act; 28 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.
* Failure to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing; 42 U.S.C. § 3608(d)(5).
* Denial of Procedural Due Process; Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
* Declaratory Judgment Act; 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202.

Demand Letter to HUD (PDF)

May 24, 2001 letter from Steven Fischbach to Ms. Ellen R. Connolly, Director of HUD Housing Division, Boston, and Mr. Stephen A. Vadnais, Executive Director, Woonsocket Housing Authority.

ankara escort istanbul escort bayan
ankara escort istanbul escort bayan