C.F.R. » Title 24 » PART 1—NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY ASSISTED PROGRAMS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT—EFFECTUATION OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964

24 C.F.R. § 1.1

Purpose

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The purpose of this part 1 is to effectuate the provisions of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (hereafter referred to as the Act) to the end that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1969–2020 · leading case: Rachel Evans v. James T. Lynn v. The Town of New Castle, Appellee-Intervenor
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rachel Evans v. James T. Lynn v. The Town of New Castle, Appellee-Intervenor (1976) ca2 “§ 2000d-l by HUD, see 24 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq., and Interior, see, 43 C.”
Young v. Pierce (1982) txed “, 24 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 , 1.4(a), 1.4(b)(1). Whether HUD has violated the law, by abrogating its affirmative duties and thereby funding racially discriminatory housing projects in East Texas, is a common question of law in this action; indeed, in a crucial sense, that question is the…”
Feliciano v. Romney (1973) nysd · cites it 2× “See 24 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 -.12 (1972). 44 . See Complaint, 44, 73; see also note 22 supra.”
National Ass'n v. Wilmington Medical Center, Inc. (1978) ded “of Health, Education and Welfare); 24 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq. (Dept. of Housing and Urban Development); 43 C.”
Johnson v. County of Chester (1976) paed “No action, however, may be taken until there has been notice of a failure to comply and a determination that compliance may not be secured by voluntary means.”
Community Brotherhood of Lynn, Inc. v. Lynn Redevelopment Authority (1981) mad “With respect to programs funded or assisted by HUD, regulations have been promulgated detailing the procedures to be followed in investigations of complaints, requiring extensive conciliation attempts both by the Regional office and the assistant Secretary, and requiring 30 days…”
Latino Project, Inc. v. City of Camden (1982) njd “Under Title VI implementing regulations 24 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq. (1981), HUD receives and investigates complaints charging discrimination in federally assisted programs within HUD’s jurisdiction.”
Shannon v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development (1969) paed “24 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 , 2.1 et seq. There is also a question whether their claims under the Fair Housing Act of 1968 should not be processed under the procedures established therein.”
Weatherford v. Nevada Rural Housing Authority (2013) nvd “See 24 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq. The Court grants Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in part on portions of Count I and all of Count III because Weatherford is attempting to enforce HUD’s regulations.”
Clients' Council v. Pierce (1982) arwd “24 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 , et seq.; §§ 2.1, et seq.”
Jones v. Tully (1974) nyed “§ 2000d and in accordance with § 2000d-l, I-IUD promulgated regulations designed to prevent discrimination in federally financed housing programs at 24 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq. Following the mandate of Shannon, supra, HUD developed further procedures to prevent discrimination in its…”
Stroud v. Farr Rentals, LLC (2020) moed “See 24 C.F.R. § 1.1 . Courts have held there is no private cause of action to enforce HUD regulations.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.