12 U.S.C. § 4110
PRESERVATION OF AUTHORITY.
“Nothing in this subtitle may be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary under any other provision of law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 2005–2010 · leading case: CCA Assocs. v. United States, 75 Fed. Cl. 170 (Fed. Cl. 2007).
CCA Assocs. v. United States, 75 Fed. Cl. 170 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “12 U.S.C. § 4110 (b)(1). For properties appraised under LIHPRHA, HUD also required calculation of the so-called “aggregate preservation rents” by a formula that estimated the “gross potential income for the project;” such an estimate entailed covering various costs, such as debt…”
Cienega Gardens v. United States, 503 F.3d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “See 12 U.S.C. § 4110 (2000). [2] For a fifteen-month period, the owners were required to sell the property at the "the fair market value of the housing based on the highest and best use of the property" to particular organizations that would agree to preserve the rent…”
CCA Assocs. v. United States, 91 Fed. Cl. 580 (Fed. Cl. 2010). “12 U.S.C. § 4110 (c); 24 C.F.R. § 248.101 (1993).”
Cienega Gardens v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 434 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “12 U.S.C. § 4110 (b)(1); id. § 4121(a). The sale price was prohibited from exceeding the preservation value determined by the appraisal process.”
City Line Jt. Venture v. United States, 71 Fed. Cl. 486 (Fed. Cl. 2006). “12 U.S.C. §§ 4110 (a), 4121(a), (b). LIHPRHA also contemplated HUD-provided financial assistance to qualifying purchasers to facilitate the sale of the property.”
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.