Section 2

Citation: Section 2
Parent Document: Thorpe v. Housing Authority of Durham, 393 U.S. 268 (1969)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1969-02-24
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/107814/thorpe-v-housing-authority-of-durham/ ↗

Full Text

1,276 chars

Petitioner argues that in addition to holding the HUD circular applicable to her case, we must also establish guidelines to insure that she is provided with not only *284 the reasons for her eviction but also a hearing that comports with the requirements of due process. We do not sit, however, "to decide abstract, hypothetical or contingent questions . . . or to decide any constitutional question in advance of the necessity for its decision. . . ."[47] The Authority may be able to provide petitioner with reasons that justify eviction under the express terms of the lease. In that event, she may decide to vacate voluntarily without contesting the Authority's right to have her removed. And if she challenges the reasons offered, the Authority may well decide to afford her the full hearing she insists is essential.[48] Moreover, even if the Authority does not provide such a hearing, we have no reason to believe that once petitioner is told the reasons for her eviction she cannot effectively challenge their legal sufficiency in whatever eviction proceedings may be brought in the North Carolina courts. Thus, with the case in this posture, a decision on petitioner's constitutional claims would be premature.[49] Reversed and remanded. MR. JUSTICE BLACK, concurring.

Other Sections in This Document (147)

Full Text