Other claims in the tenant's complaint had included: (1) that HUD’s action was arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act; (2) that HUD violate their procedural due process rights under the Fifth Amendment; (3) that HUD violated its duty to affirmative further fair housing under the Fair Housing Act, (4) that the owner violated the Use Agreement.
In this case, the court found protected property interests in the tenants' subsidized leaseholds, and that the notices and meetings provided by HUD failed to satisfy basic constitutional requirements.
1. Roundtree PI order (PDF)
