§ 1437f

Citation: § 1437f
Parent Document: Nozzi v. Housing Authority, 806 F.3d 1178 (2015)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2015-11-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3158630/nozzi-v-housing-authority/ ↗

Full Text

1,122 chars

18
     Similarly unavailing is the Housing Authority’s reliance on a letter
purportedly sent to all beneficiaries on April 19, 2005. The Housing
Authority did not assert that this letter is in the record, nor is there any
evidence of it being so. It is only mentioned in passing in a discussion in
the deposition of one of the Housing Authority’s employees. That
employee declared only that it was “similar to” the flyer. For the reasons
already discussed, any letter that was simply “similar to” the flyer would
be inadequate to provide the necessary notice for the same reasons as the
flyer itself. Furthermore, the letter, like the four-week notice discussed in
the next paragraph, was sent too late to have been of any use to many
beneficiaries.
  19
    The Housing Authority relies on Willis v. United States, 787 F.2d
1089 (7th Cir. 1986) for the proposition that this Court should consider
subsequent steps like the four-week notice. That case is of no relevance.
There, a plaintiff claimed that procedures attending the forfeiture of his
                          NOZZI V. HACLA                               29

Other Sections in This Document (154)

Full Text