Johnson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), 911 F.2d 1302 (1990)

Citation: Johnson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), 911 F.2d 1302 (1990)
Parent Document: Johnson v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), 911 F.2d 1302 (1990)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1990-10-29
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/546951/johnson-v-united-states-departme... ↗

Full Text

760 chars

21
The parties' arguments can be briefly summarized as follows. Plaintiffs urge us to give great weight to the clarifying language in the Reform Act of 1989 which indicates Congress intended the 1987 Preservation Act to include mortgage insurance termination. They argue that the clarifying language in the Reform Act comports with both the language and purposes of the 1987 Act. The private defendants, on the other hand, argue that the original language of the Preservation Act cannot reasonably be interpreted to include mortgage insurance termination, that Congress' subsequent declaration of intent in the Reform Act of 1989 is not a clarification of the 1987 Preservation Act, and, finally, that the Reform Act is not entitled to retroactive application.

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text