Grier v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (2015)

Citation: Grier v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (2015)
Parent Document: Grier v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (2015)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2015-07-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2816866/grier-v-united-states-departmen... ↗

Full Text

1,125 chars

Pursuant to HAP and statutory requirements, a property
owner may not, inter alia, increase Section 8 tenants’ rents
without giving those tenants and HUD one year’s notice of the
proposed termination of a HAP contract. Nevertheless, in
September 2011, Mantua Gardens sent notices to all of its
Section 8 tenants informing them that they would have to sign
new leases and pay new rents. No notice was given to either
HUD or the tenants of any proposal to terminate the HAP
contract. The ALJ and the Secretary found that this conduct by
Mantua Gardens violated 42 U.S.C. § 1437f(c)(8)(B), and
imposed penalties. Mantua Gardens argues, as it did before the
agency, that at the time of its alleged violations of the Section 8
program, there was no HAP contract in place to violate because
the contract had expired and had not yet been replaced with a
new contract. Mantua Gardens asserts that consequently the
Secretary’s finding of liability for violations of the Section 8
program was arbitrary and capricious and not supported by
substantial evidence. But as the Secretary explained, not only
                                9

Other Sections in This Document (46)

Full Text