Lutul Love v. United States Department Of Housing & Urban Development, 704 F.2d 100 (1983)

Citation: Lutul Love v. United States Department Of Housing & Urban Development, 704 F.2d 100 (1983)
Parent Document: Lutul Love v. United States Department Of Housing & Urban Development, 704 F.2d 100 (1983)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1983-08-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/416563/lutul-love-v-united-states-depar... ↗

Full Text

741 chars

26
Because HUD was already in the process of promulgating regulations prohibiting unreasonable lease provisions9--a process that has since been completed--HUD does not appeal from the part of the district court's order that requires it to do so.10 HUD does object, however, to the facet of the order that requires HUD to institute a tenant-comment procedure to assist the Secretary's identification of unreasonable lease provisions. HUD's objections are three-fold. First, HUD argues that section 202(b)(1)--the only provision of the 1978 amendments that deals with tenant comment--does not pertain to lease provisions, makes tenant comment optional with the Secretary, and seems to exclude lease agreements from the ambit of tenant comment.

Other Sections in This Document (61)

Full Text