DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 4625

Citation
Section 4625
Parent Document
Cole v. Harris, 187 U.S. App. D.C. 156 (1977)
Effective Date
1977-11-14
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7891523/cole-v-harris/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (158)

Full Text

646 chars 
The government’s final argument is that the plain terms of the Uniform Relocation Act cannot be heeded because to do so would impose a financial burden on HUD. The essential point, however, is that any financial burden results not from our construction of the Act but rather from HUD’s own decision to displace people in order to demolish their homes. HUD appears to suggest that if the costs of relocation are too heavy for government funds, the displaced tenants should bear them. But the mandate of the Act is precisely contrary: if the costs are too much for HUD, then the demolition should not take place.33 III. AMOUNT OF BENEFITS AVAILABLE