| Court: | US District Court, Northern CA |
| Facts: | Mitchell rents an apartment; Chang is the landlord, subsidizing a portion of Mitchell's rent. After the lease is up (12 months), Chang says Mitchell is not going to get a renewal. Mitchell fails to vacate. Complaint for eviction. |
| Posture: | Motion to prohibit the eviction |
| Issue: | When can a landlord receiving public money decline to renew a lease? |
| Holding: | Not now. Injuction. |
| Rule: | If the owner is going to keep the housing unit in the public housing program, then they can't pick tenants. |
| Reasoning: | If the statute were applicable only to mid-lease termination, it
would have said "terminate the lease" instead of "terminate
the tenancy." We don't want an individual unit loophole here.
A landlord would have to show a good business reason.
Also, it would be very hard on the tenants. |
| Dicta: | |