Posts tagged "1103314"

Loring Towers Associates v. Furtick v. Boston Housing Authority (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-033-14)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02108-1750;  (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us       13‑P‑799                                        Appeals Court   LORING TOWERS ASSOCIATES[1]  vs.  MELVIN FURTICK; BOSTON HOUSING AUTHORITY, third-party defendant. No. 13‑P‑799. Essex.     December 3, 2013.  ‑  March 27, 2014. Present:  Grainger, Brown, & Carhart, JJ.   Summary Process.  Practice, Civil, Summary process, Complaint, Parties.  Boston Housing Authority.  Due Process of Law, Housing.       Summary process.  Complaint filed in the Salem Division of the District Court Department on April 23, 2012.   Following transfer to the Northeast Division of the Housing Court Department, a motion to dismiss a third‑party complaint was heard by David D. Kerman, J.     Michael J. Louis & Angela Marcolina for Boston Housing Authority. Laura Gallant (James Breslauer with her) for Melvin Furtick.       BROWN, J.  Melvin Furtick, a physically disabled and mentally ill senior citizen, has been a participant in the Federal Housing Choice Voucher Program, better known as “section 8,” for over thirty years.[2]  The Boston Housing Authority (BHA) terminated Furtick’s housing assistance benefits, a protected property interest, in violation of his due process rights.  Such a result cannot be countenanced by any court of law.  Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Housing Court in this summary process litigation restoring Furtick’s housing benefits retroactively to the date of the unlawful termination.   Facts.  Except where noted, the following facts are undisputed.  On January 17, 2012, the leased housing division of the BHA sent a letter addressed to Furtick at his subsidized apartment in Salem, notifying him of the proposed termination of his housing assistance benefits based upon his failure to attend two section 8 voucher recertification meetings scheduled for November 28, 2011, and December 22, 2011.  See § 13.6.2 of the BHA Administrative Plan for Section 8 Programs (revised December 6, 2011) (BHA administrative plan).  The BHA letter informed Furtick that he had the right to an informal hearing regarding the proposed termination before the BHA’s department of grievances and appeals as long as he requested a hearing within twenty days.  See id. at § 13.6.3.  When Furtick failed to respond within the twenty-day appeal period, the BHA, by letter dated February 7, 2012, and mailed to his apartment, terminated Furtick’s subsidy effective March 31, 2012.  As Furtick was in jail during that time, he had no actual knowledge of any of this.[3]  Upon his release, Furtick returned to his apartment and discovered that […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - March 27, 2014 at 4:33 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , , , , , , ,