U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development on Behalf of Pantoja v. Simpson

Sixth Circuit

U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development on Behalf of Pantoja v. Simpson

54 F.3d 777, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17720, 1995 WL 283837

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMay 10, 1995

Docket95-3360

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 54 F.3d 777 (U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development on Behalf of Pantoja v. Simpson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development on Behalf of Pantoja v. Simpson, 54 F.3d 777, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17720, 1995 WL 283837 (6th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

54 F.3d 777
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.

UNITED STATES, Of America, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, on behalf of Laura R. Pantoja, Victor
R. Pantoja and Laura L. Pantoja, Petitioner,
v.
Dwight M. SIMPSON, Jr.; Caroline Simpson, Respondents.

No. 95-3360.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 10, 1995.

Before: SUHRHEINRICH and DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judges; and HEYBURN, District Judge.*

ORDER

The Secretary, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development petitions for enforcement pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3612(j) of the September 9, 1994, decision under the Fair Housing Act (the "Act"). Respondents have filed an opposition to the petition for enforcement and request oral argument. However, because respondents did not file a petition for review of the decision within forty-five days, the Act provides that "the administrative law judge's findings of fact and order shall be conclusive" in connection with the petition for enforcement. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3612(l). In addition, the Act provides that where a petition for enforcement is filed in the absence of a petition for review, the clerk of the court of appeals "shall forthwith enter a decree enforcing the order." 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3612(n). We conclude, therefore, that the Secretary is entitled to enforcement of the decision.

It is ORDERED that the petition for enforcement is granted and the decision of the Secretary in HUD v. Simpson, 04-92-0708-8, is hereby enforced.

*

The Honorable John G. Heyburn, II, United States District Judge for the Western District of Kentucky, sitting by designation

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

54 F.3d 777
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.

UNITED STATES, Of America, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, on behalf of Laura R. Pantoja, Victor
R. Pantoja and Laura L. Pantoja, Petitioner,
v.
Dwight M. SIMPSON, Jr.; Caroline Simpson, Respondents.

No. 95-3360.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 10, 1995.

Before: SUHRHEINRICH and DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judges; and HEYBURN, District Judge.*

ORDER

The Secretary, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development petitions for enforcement pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3612(j) of the September 9, 1994, decision under the Fair Housing Act (the "Act"). Respondents have filed an opposition to the petition for enforcement and request oral argument. However, because respondents did not file a petition for review of the decision within forty-five days, the Act provides that "the administrative law judge's findings of fact and order shall be conclusive" in connection with the petition for enforcement. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3612(l). In addition, the Act provides that where a petition for enforcement is filed in the absence of a petition for review, the clerk of the court of appeals "shall forthwith enter a decree enforcing the order." 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3612(n). We conclude, therefore, that the Secretary is entitled to enforcement of the decision.

It is ORDERED that the petition for enforcement is granted and the decision of the Secretary in HUD v. Simpson, 04-92-0708-8, is hereby enforced.

*

The Honorable John G. Heyburn, II, United States District Judge for the Western District of Kentucky, sitting by designation

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 F.3d 777, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17720, 1995 WL 283837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/us-dept-of-housing-and-urban-development-on-behalf-of-pantoja-v-simpson-ca6-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack