24 C.F.R. § 883.101
General
(a) The purpose of the Section 8 program is to provide decent, safe and sanitary housing for low-income families through the use of a system of housing assistance payments. These needs may be met by statewide or special purpose housing agencies established by the various States.
(b) The regulations in this part 883 contain the policies and procedures applicable to the Section 8 program for these State agencies.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1982–2015 · leading case: Atkins v. Robinson, 545 F. Supp. 852 (E.D. Va. 1982).
Atkins v. Robinson, 545 F. Supp. 852 (E.D. Va. 1982). “14 See 24 C.F.R. § 883.101 (a)(2). Another line of access to Section 8 assistance, and the one most relevant to this action, is through statewide or special purpose housing agencies, like the VHDA, established by the various states.”
Evergreen Square v. Wisconsin Hous. & Econ. Dev. Auth., 776 F.3d 463 (7th Cir. 2015). “§ 1437f and related regulations and notices promulgated by HUD, see 24 C.F.R. § 883.101 , et seq. These issues are necessarily raised, actually disputed, and substantial.”
Gautreaux v. Pierce, 690 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982). “” 24 C.F.R. § 883.101 (a)(3) (1981). Ordinarily, from this lump sum Congressional authorization for Section 8 programs, HUD establishes separate funding authority for each of the Section 8 programs, including a set-aside for State Housing Agencies.”
Eidson v. Pierce, 745 F.2d 453 (7th Cir. 1984). “See also 24 C.F.R. § 883.101 (f) (owner responsible for selection of tenants); 24 C.”
Price v. Pierce, 615 F. Supp. 173 (N.D. Ill. 1985). “IHDA is a public housing agency within the meaning of federal statute and is governed by federal regulations at 24 C.F.R. § 883.101 , et seq. IHDA was established *179 pursuant to Illinois state law.”
Hill v. Grp. Three Hous. Dev. Corp., 799 F.2d 385 (8th Cir. 1986). “§ 1437f(a); see 24 C.F.R. § 883.101 (a) (1984). To that end, the Secretary of HUD is authorized to enter into contracts to make housing assistance payments to private owners of housing in which some or all of the units shall be leased to lower-income families.”
Genovese v. Gazette Publications, Inc., 7 Mass. L. Rptr. 353 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1997). “24 C.F.R. §883.101 (a). The Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) currently has under review a case that raises the issue of whether the anti-SLAPP statute protects only individuals from unwarranted suits or applies to commercial entities as well.”
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.