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
Noundja v. Lynn Community Development Housing Corporation
No. 96-CV-00192 (Mass. Housing Ct. Northeast May 26, 2005) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55929
Description
Community Development Corporation Violates Federal Relocation Assistance Laws by Not Notifying and Assisting Displaced Single Room Occupancy Residents
Abstract
The court held that displaced single room occupancy residents were
entitled to summary judgment on their federal relocation assistance
claims against a community development corporation. Plaintiffs
claimed that defendant’s f urban renewal project undertaken
with city block grant funds and federal financial assistance
improperly displaced them from their single room occupancy housing.
Defendant rehabilitated 130 of 244 units; 30 units were converted
and sold to other than low-income residents; and 84 units were
demolished. Plaintiffs sought relief under the federal Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of
1970, 42 U.S.C. 4601; Section 104(d) of the federal Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. § 5304; Section
105 of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.
§ 12705(b)(16); and state relocation assistance and consumer
protection laws. After acquiring title to six rooming-house
properties through a foreclosure sale, defendant sent displacement
notices to some but not all rooming house occupants. The court
stated that a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
determination issued on April 4, 2005, had ruled that the
properties were part of a federally funding demolition plan
requiring relocation benefits for eligible tenants under the first
two federal laws cited above. Finding defendant’s notices
inadequate, the court required defendant to renotify all persons
who occupied any of the single room occupancy properties between
May 15, 1996, and April 24, 1997, about their potential entitlement
to relocation assistance cash benefits.
Additional Information
Files
- Motion for class certification
- Memorandum in support of plaintiffs' motion for class certification
- First amended class action complaint and request for injunctive relief
- Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment
- Memorandum in support of plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment
- Plaintiffs' reply to LCDHC's opposition to motion for partial summary judgment
- Decision and order
- Judgment
