Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Whitelaw v. Hous. Auth. of the City of Richmond
No. MSN03-0604 (Cal. Super. Ct. Contra Costa County Mar. 22, 2004) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55586
Description
Housing Authority’s Termination of Former Tenant from Section 8 Voucher Program Is Set Aside
Abstract
The court granted Section 8 voucher program recipient’s
petition to set aside defendant housing authority’s decision
to terminate her from the program for failing to report income when
she was not receiving assistance. Petitioner, who had been
receiving benefits under the federal Section 8 housing assistance
voucher program (24 C.F.R. Sec. 982 et seq.), became
employed and moved from her Section 8 unit. Defendant housing
authority, after notice and a hearing, terminated her from the
Section 8 program for failing to report income while a
“participant” of or “applicant” for the
Section 8 voucher program. Petitioner argued that, under federal
regulations and defendant’s administrative plan, she was
neither a “participant” nor an “applicant.”
Even if she were, the income information was not required as it was
not “necessary for the administration” of the Section 8
program. Petitioner contended that the court had the power to
reinstate her because in terminating her the housing authority not
merely used its discretion but acted contrary to law. Without
written comment, the court set aside the termination and ordered
petitioner reinstated into the Section 8 voucher program.
Additional Information
Files
No files available.
