Barrientos v. 1801-1825 Morton LLC (2009)

Citation: Barrientos v. 1801-1825 Morton LLC (2009)
Parent Document: Barrientos v. 1801-1825 Morton LLC (2009)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2009-10-09
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3065171/barrientos-v-1801-1825-morton-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,603 chars

state statute that forces owners to remain in a federally subsidized program
from which Congress has authorized withdrawal would eviscerate the
method Congress chose to implement the federal low-income housing
scheme.” Forest Park II v. Hadley, 336 F.3d 724, 733-34 (8th Cir. 2003).
In Forest Park II, owners who wished to prepay their section 236 mort-
gage as expressly permitted by the 1999 Veteran Affairs & HUD Appro-
priations Act, Pub. L. No. 105-276, § 219(b)(3), 112 Stat. 2461, 2488
(1998), challenged additional procedural requirements embodied in state
statutes applicable to landlords of federally subsidized rental housing. The
Eighth Circuit held that the state statutes were expressly and impliedly
preempted by federal law permitting repayment, reasoning that the “fur-
ther requirement imposed by a state statute would directly interfere with
Congress’s original intent of offering prepayment as an incentive.” Forest
Park II, 336 F.3d at 733. Here, however, LARSO does not directly inter-
fere with a federal agency regulation, because HUD explicitly left the
“good cause” determination up to state courts for case-by-case analysis,
and LARSO simply provides the relevant local law that the courts apply
in eviction proceedings. Furthermore, while the state laws at issue in For-
est Park II were aimed specifically at participants in federal housing pro-
grams, LARSO is a background law of general applicability.
14448        BARRIENTOS v. 1801-1825 MORTON LLC
application of a variety of state and local laws that could
affect the profitability of their investments.” Id. at 1244.

Other Sections in This Document (60)

Full Text