Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

pe2 housing v baker, No. 25-cv-5036 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024)

Citation
pe2 housing v baker, No. 25-cv-5036 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024)
Parent Document
pe2 housing v baker, No. 25-cv-5036 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024)
Jurisdiction
Vermont (state)
Effective Date
2024-11-01

Other Sections in This Document (102)

Full Text

388 chars
Defendant makes two arguments in support of the motion to dismiss. First, he argues
that the rent increase during the initial rental term was unlawful. And second, he argues
that the rent increase is not authorized under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) -related covenant. Applying the standard applicable to a motion pursuant to
V.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) neither argument is persuasive.