Gonzalez v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corp.

Second Circuit

Gonzalez v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corp.

848 F.2d 391, 1988 WL 60036

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided June 13, 1988·No. No. 1104, Docket 88-6032·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs-appellants, elderly or disabled tenants of a low-income congregate care facility in Manhattan operated by defendant-appellee St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corporation (St. Margaret’s), appeal from an order and final judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Leval, J., dated November 30,1987. Judge Leval had held that: (1) the mandatory meal charge imposed on tenants by St. Margaret’s did not constitute “rent” within the meaning of the “Brooke Amendment” to the United States Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(a)(1) (1982 & Supp. Ill 1985); (2) the Regulatory Agreement between the defendant-appellee United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and St. Margaret’s did not bar the meal charge; and (3) the tenants who refused to pay the mandatory meal charge were liable to St. Margaret’s for breach of contract.

We affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Leval in his opinion, Gonzalez v. St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corp., 668 F.Supp. 187 (S.D.N.Y.1987).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs-appellants, elderly or disabled tenants of a low-income congregate care facility in Manhattan operated by defendant-appellee St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corporation (St. Margaret’s), appeal from an order and final judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Leval, J., dated November 30,1987. Judge Leval had held that: (1) the mandatory meal charge imposed on tenants by St. Margaret’s did not constitute “rent” within the meaning of the “Brooke Amendment” to the United States Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(a)(1) (1982 & Supp. Ill 1985); (2) the Regulatory Agreement between the defendant-appellee United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and St. Margaret’s did not bar the meal charge; and (3) the tenants who refused to pay the mandatory meal charge were liable to St. Margaret’s for breach of contract.

We affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Leval in his opinion, Gonzalez v. St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corp., 668 F.Supp. 187 (S.D.N.Y.1987).

Gonzalez v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corp., 848 F.2d 391, 1988 WL 60036 (2d Cir. 1988).

Pincite

848 F.2d 391 (Gonzalez v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related