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

567 chars 
A careful reading of HUD’s brief shows that it never argued at all that a demolition, rather than a construction, is not a “project.” Not only would this argument generally be rather simple-minded, because demolition usually precedes construction, but HUD would have to know that it would be inapplicable here, as Sky Tower was concededly being torn down to make way for the construction to single-family units. Rather than making this clearly flawed argument, the HUD Brief is advancing a reading of the notice clause based upon the purpose Congress intended for it.