Cruz Management Co. v. Wideman, 633 N.E.2d 384 (1994)

Citation: Cruz Management Co. v. Wideman, 633 N.E.2d 384 (1994) 3.
Parent Document: Cruz Management Co. v. Wideman, 633 N.E.2d 384 (1994)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 1994-05-12
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2218949/cruz-management-co-v-wideman/ ↗

Full Text

1,077 chars

3. As its final point, MHFA argues that it is unsound, as matter of policy, to favor recovery for a single tenant over the interests of the general population in a housing development when limited funds are available to correct deficiencies in low income housing. MHFA suggests that the power it possesses to regulate the conduct of section 8 landlords obviates the need for a strong incentive to section 8 tenants to sue and force repairs to their apartments. The facts of this case prove otherwise. Wideman lived for two years in an apartment lacking heat, infested by vermin, and plagued by other serious deficiencies. As mortgagee, and section 8 administrator, MHFA was fully apprised of the deplorable conditions at the project in which Wideman’s apartment was located. It had, in fact, removed the prior owner as manager of the project and substituted Cruz Management. Conditions still did not improve. It is obvious that “[l]ow income tenants receiving rent subsidies, who are often the victims of the most flagrant violations [in housing conditions],” Simon v. Solomon,

Other Sections in This Document (57)

Full Text