Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Williams v. Pierce, 708 F.2d 57 (1983)

Citation
Williams v. Pierce, 708 F.2d 57 (1983)
Parent Document
Williams v. Pierce, 708 F.2d 57 (1983)
Effective Date
1983-05-12

Other Sections in This Document (51)

Full Text

904 chars
44
I disagree. The NYCHA is legally empowered to raise Williams' rent on 30 days notice; moreover, HUD is exerting pressure on NYCHA to put the rent increase into effect immediately, and NYCHA risks sanctions for failing to do so. Although Williams may be spared for several months if he is fortunate, I agree with the observation of this Court in Carey v. Klutznick, 637 F.2d 834, 837 (2d Cir.1980), that "although the irreparable injury that [appellants] seek to assert [is] a 'possibility,' every irreparable injury is merely a possibility until it is actual and can no longer be averted." Under these circumstances, I am sympathetic to Williams' argument that the government should not be permitted, in litigation with poor and powerless citizens such as Williams, to evade review of its actions by arguments that any time a citizen may try to seek relief is the wrong time. Williams Reply Br. at 17.