Stevens v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SOUTH BEND, IND., 663 F.3d 300 (2011)

Citation: Stevens v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SOUTH BEND, IND., 663 F.3d 300 (2011)
Parent Document: Stevens v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SOUTH BEND, IND., 663 F.3d 300 (2011)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2011-12-01
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/618130/stevens-v-housing-authority-of-s... ↗

Full Text

1,392 chars

make and enforce a contract by terminating her lease on
account of race; (3) breached a contract between them-
selves and the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development (“HUD”), for which Stevens was a
third-party beneficiary; and (4) violated her right to
equal protection and due process by threatening to take
action against her under the Indiana ejectment statute,
in contravention of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.2 In each instance,
Stevens alleged that the defendants’ actions caused her
emotional distress. She sought a declaratory judgment
that the Indiana ejectment statute violates both state and
federal law, an injunction against the application of the
ejectment statute to her, and both compensatory and
exemplary damages.
  After Stevens filed her suit but before she served the
defendants, HASB filed an action for immediate posses-
sion of Stevens’ unit in state court. When HASB
became aware of the lawsuit, it dismissed the state
court action and reasserted the claim for immediate
possession as a compulsory counterclaim in the instant
case.
  On November 6, 2008, HASB issued an “Important 30-
day Notice to Terminate Lease for Disturbing the Peace
and for an Unauthorized Live In” (“Second Notice”). R. 62-
5, at 27-29. The Second Notice asserted that the South
Bend Police Department reported to HASB on Novem-
ber 5, 2008 that police officers were called to Stevens’

Other Sections in This Document (42)

Full Text