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

1,736 chars

the term. She did not wish to lose her apartment and
left only because she received the Second and Third
Notices. Each of those Notices indicated that she had
violated the lease in a manner different from and in
addition to the incident that led to the First Notice, and
each subsequent Notice directed her to vacate the
property within thirty days. In her own words, she
“didn’t volunteer to vacate,” but when told she had
thirty days to move, she decided not to fight those addi-
tional Notices and “just decided to move.” R. 62-3, at 48;
R. 62-4, at 10.
   Whether she left voluntarily or was forced out by the
additional Notices is irrelevant, however, to the issue
of mootness. A case is moot when a plaintiff no longer
has a legally cognizable interest in the outcome. St. John’s
United Church of Christ v. City of Chicago, 502 F.3d 616,
626 (7th Cir. 2007). When a court’s decision can no
longer affect the rights of the litigants in the case before
it, the case becomes moot. St. John’s, 502 F.3d at 626;
Brown v. Bartholomew Consol. Sch. Corp., 442 F.3d 588,
596 (7th Cir. 2006). Stevens left for reasons other than
the First Notice, and her lawsuit is based entirely on
the consequences of the First Notice. Given that she
ultimately left her apartment for reasons unrelated
to the acts that form the basis of the lawsuit, the appro-
priate question is whether she retains a legally cog-
nizable interest in the outcome of the suit and whether
the court’s decision could affect her rights. She can no
longer be restored to the apartment because she has
decided not to contest two subsequent eviction Notices
based on reasons independent of the acts alleged in this
14                                               No. 10-2724

Other Sections in This Document (42)

Full Text