Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Suella Debolt v. Michael Espy, 47 F.3d 777 (1995)

Citation
Suella Debolt v. Michael Espy, 47 F.3d 777 (1995)
Parent Document
Suella Debolt v. Michael Espy, 47 F.3d 777 (1995)
Effective Date
1995-05-05

Other Sections in This Document (48)

Full Text

559 chars
In addition, the plaintiff also claims that the FmHA violated FmHA regulations by not properly reviewing her termination notice. The applicable regulation states that “[i]f the notice of termination fails to meet the technical requirements of preparation, the Servicing Official will ... [ijnform the borrower [i.e., landlord] to cease the [eviction and] [i]nform the borrower that it may reissue a new revised notice of termination if the borrower believes the conditions still warrant such action.” 7 C.F.R. Part 1930, Subpart C, Exhibit B, ¶ XIV(D) (1994).