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
Anderson v. Housing Authority of San Antonio
No.SA 04 CA 1060 OG (W.D. Tex. November 24, 2004) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55825
Description
Section 8 Certificate Holder Seeks to Prevent San Antonio Housing Authority from Terminating Her Housing Voucher Without Giving Her Adequate Notice
Abstract
Plaintiff single parent of five minor children seeks to restrain
defendant San Antonio housing authority officials from terminating
her Section 8 housing benefits without giving adequate notice of
the reasons for such termination in violation of federal law and
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations 24
C.F.R. § 982.552, .555. Plaintiff asserts that, shortly after
moving into a house, severe water leaks and other problems caused
the house to fail to meet federal housing quality standards.
Plaintiff complained to housing authority about the water leaks,
rats, electrical and other problems, and defendant sent an
inspector to investigate. When landlord did not make repairs in
response to the failed inspection notice, the housing authority
advised plaintiff that she could move. Then defendant notified
plaintiff that her housing subsidy would be terminated because she
did not replace the batteries in a smoke detector. Fearing for the
health and safety of her family and believing that her subsidy
would cease, plaintiff moved. Two months later at an informal
hearing an officer reinstated plaintiff’s housing benefits,
but a new subsidy was never issued. For six months, plaintiff
received from housing authority various termination notices stating
the following inaccurate reasons for terminating: “HQS breach
caused by family” and “unreported family income.”
Plaintiff alleges that the loss of subsidized housing benefits
constitutes irreparable injury.
