Mandamus relief restores housing subsidy
Most of the names in these stories have been changed to protect privacy.
In January 2007, attorneys in the Los Angeles office filed a mandamus petition for Margaret Ferst. Her Section 8 benefits had been cut off because of allegations that she threatened staff at a public housing authority.
In their petition, her attorneys claimed that the housing authority:
- Had violated her due process rights; and
- Had not complied with federal and state law.
Ms. Ferst's attorneys asked the court to:
- Vacate the housing authority’s hearing decision;
- Reinstate Ms. Ferst’s Section 8 subsidy; and
- Order the housing authority to conform its Section 8 administrative policies and practices to the law - including those laws dealing with termination, appeals, and reasonable accommodation.
Efforts to settle the action failed. But in October 2007, her attorneys again represented Ms. Ferst - this time in Superior Court. In the end, the presiding judge:
- Found that the housing authority had, in fact, violated Ms. Ferst’s due process rights; and
- Ordered the housing authority to reinstate Ms. Ferst's Section 8 subsidy.
