United States v. Ehrlich

147 F. Supp. 660, 1956 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4145
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia
DecidedNovember 30, 1956
DocketCiv. No. 736
StatusPublished

This text of 147 F. Supp. 660 (United States v. Ehrlich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Ehrlich, 147 F. Supp. 660, 1956 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4145 (S.D. Ga. 1956).

Opinion

SCARLETT, District Judge.

The above-stated case was brought by the United States of America against Louis Ehrlich, et al., to recover the following designated parcels of land:

Lot 8, 1263 Holden Court, Oglethorpe Homes, Augusta, Georgia;

Lot 10, 1259 Holden Court, Oglethorpe Homes, Augusta, Georgia;

Lot 13, 1247-49 Holden Court, Oglethorpe Homes, Augusta, Georgia;

Lot 17, 1237-39 Holden Drive, Oglethorpe Homes, Augusta, Georgia;

Lot 26, 1213-15 Holden Drive, Oglethorpe Homes, Augusta, Georgia; and

Lot 44, 1236 Holden Drive, Oglethorpe Homes, Augusta, Georgia,

which were conveyed to Robert A. Ham-brick, George A. Buck, Sr., Raymond A. Eades, Sherwood C. Lindsey, Robert D. Jarvis and John W. Wren, Jr., by the Public Housing Administration on or about December 2, 1954, pursuant to the terms of the Lanham Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1521 et seq., on the grounds that Louis Ehrlich and the other designated defendants entered into a fraudulent scheme in that Louis Ehrlich, a non-veteran or serviceman, obtained title to the above-described property at a preferential price given to veterans and servicemen under the Lanham Act.

The Georgia Railroad Bank and Trust Company was named a party defendant in this action in view of its holding a deed to secure debt, covering the subject parcels of land, executed by the defendant Ehrlich. The Georgia Railroad Bank and Trust Company and Louis Ehrlich filed a motion to dismiss the complaint upon jurisdictional grounds and because the United States of America made no offer of restitution of the purchase price of the property, which were overruled by the Court. Upon a subsequent cancellation of its security deed covering the hereinabove described property, and with consent of all parties, the Georgia [661]*661Railroad Bank and Trust Company was dismissed as a party defendant.

The defendants Louis Ehrlich, Robert A. Hambrick and John W. Wren, Jr., filed answers denying the allegation of their participation in a fraudulent scheme to obtain title to the above-described property and the other defendants filed no response to the complaint.

Upon the pleadings and the evidence adduced at the trial of the case to the Court without a jury, with consent of all parties, on June 11, 1956, the Court makes the following:

Findings of Fact

1. In October, 1954, the Oglethorpe Homes Subdivision, consisting of 31 single units and 22 duplex units, totalling 75 dwelling units, in Augusta, Georgia, owned by the Public Housing Administration, an agency of the United States, were offered for sale by individual parcels for owner-occupancy, under the provisions of the Lanham Act, as amended by the Revercomb Act, which granted priorities and price advantages to veterans and servicemen. The price advantages as to the particular lots herein involved are:

Priority Purchase Price Price to Non-Veterans and Non-Servicemen

Lot 8 — 1263 Holden Court $3,260. $4,200.

Lot 10 — 1259 Holden Court 3,260. 4,200.

Lot 13-1247-49 Holden Court 6.550. 7.150.

Lot 17-1237-39 Holden Drive 6,520. 8,400.

Lot 26-1213-15 Holden Drive 5.550. 7.150.

Lot 44 — 1236 Holden Drive 3,140. 4,050.

2. The Public Housing Administration received many more applications than there were housing units in the Oglethorpe Homes Subdivision from various individuals who were qualified under the provisions of the Lanham Act. On December 1, 1954, the night before the various units in Oglethorpe Homes were to be sold, numerous people who were eligible to purchase homes under the Lanham Act, stayed in line all night at the local office of the Public Housing Administration in Augusta, Georgia, endeavoring to purchase units for owner-occupancy, but were unable to do so because the Public Housing Administration had received applications in excess of the units for sale.

3. On or about October 26, 1954, Louis Ehrlich went to Atlanta, Georgia and had a conference with R. E. Bates, Assistant Director of Management and Disposition, Atlanta Field Office Public Housing Administration, Carl H. Johnston, Chief of the Disposition of the Public Housing Administration, R. E. Pitt, Assistant Realty Officer, Public Housing Administration, and William B. Fudger, Attorney for the Public Housing Administration, and discussed with them his eligibility to directly purchase units in the Oglethorpe Homes, which were to be sold under the provisions of the Lanham Act, and the possibility of his financing the purchase of units in Oglethorpe Homes of veterans and servicemen who were unable to accept the finance plan offered by the Public Housing Administration. Ehrlich was then informed that he was not eligible to purchase units himself, as he did not qualify under the terms of the Lanham Act, but there would be no objections to his entering into any legitimate finance plan with qualified purchasers who were unable to utilize the finance plan offered by the Government. At this conference Ehrlich was informed by William B. Fudger that in the event he purchased units in Oglethorpe Homes, criminal prosecution would be recommended. At no time during this meeting was a request made by any official of the Public Housing Administration to Ehrlich that he assist any veteran or serviceman in financing the purchase of a unit in the Oglethorpe Homes.

4. The defendant Ehrlich devised the scheme of fraudulently and illegally acquiring for himself the subject parcels of land in the Oglethorpe Homes by utilizing for himself the preferences available to veterans. This he perpetrated by [662]*662two methods; the “straw-man” purchase ; the ruse of a purported financing arrangement with indigent veterans or servicemen having the requisite priority and residing on the property to the end that actual title to the property would result in him.

5. The defendant Ehrlich took the initiative in making a general solicitation of the Oglethorpe Homes residents seeking opportunities of putting such a scheme into effect. During the latter part of November, 1954, Mr. and Mrs. Julian P. Arnold, who were at that time residents of the Oglethorpe Homes Subdivision and were qualified to purchase a housing unit in said subdivision under the Lanham Act, were contacted by defendant Louis Ehrlich, and asked if they were going to utilize their priority and purchase a unit in the Oglethorpe Homes for owner-occupancy. When informed by the Arnolds that they were not interested in exercising their priority, Ehrlich offered to finance the purchase of a dwelling unit for the Arnolds at the price offered to veterans and servicemen, provided they would convey title to same to Ehrlich immediately, with the condition that they pay the same rent for a period of 7 months that they had paid to the Public Housing Administration, and at the expiration of that period they could repurchase the unit from Ehrlich at the price given to non-veterans and non-servicemen under the Lanham Act, which was $1,080 more than the price offered to veterans and servicemen. This offer was refused by the Arnolds and shortly thereafter Ehrlich came to the Arnolds’ home and stated that he would give the Arnolds $200 to act as a “straw-purchaser”, in that Ehrlich would put up the entire serviceman’s purchase for a housing unit provided that they immediately convey him title to the property after receiving a deed from the Public Housing Administration.

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

Related

Omitted
42 U.S.C. § 1521

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
147 F. Supp. 660, 1956 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ehrlich-gasd-1956.