42 U.S.C. § 12753

Penalties for misuse of funds

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
If the Secretary finds after reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing that a participating jurisdiction has failed to comply substantially with any provision of this part and until the Secretary is satisfied that there is no longer any such failure to comply, the Secretary shall reduce the line of credit in the participating jurisdiction’s HOME Investment Trust Fund by the amount of any expenditures that were not in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter, and the Secretary may—(1) prevent withdrawals from the participating jurisdiction’s HOME Investment Trust Fund for activities affected by such failure to comply;(2) restrict the participating jurisdiction’s activities under this subchapter to activities that conform to one or more model programs made available under section 12743 of this title; or(3) remove the participating jurisdiction from participation in allocations or reallocations of funds made available under this part.(Pub. L. 101–625, title II, § 223, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4112.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2017–2020 · leading case: City of Philadelphia v. Sessions, 280 F. Supp. 3d 579 (E.D. Pa. 2017).
City of Philadelphia v. Sessions, 280 F. Supp. 3d 579 (E.D. Pa. 2017). “, 42 U.S.C. § 12753 , Penalties for Misuse of Funds (conditioning the grant of federal dollars to states under the Home Investment Partnerships on substantial compliance with the entire statutory scheme and all conditions announced therein).”
City of Huntington West Virginia v. United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. (D.D.C. 2020). “Under 42 U.S.C. § 12753 , if HUD determines that a grantee misused 3 funds, it must provide the grantee with a hearing before it reduces the credit line.”
Grant v. City of Roanoke, 265 F. Supp. 3d 654 (W.D. Va. 2017). “See 42 U.S.C. § 12753 (listing the penalties that may be imposed “[i]f the Secretary finds after reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing that a participating jurisdiction has failed to comply substantially with any provision of this part”).”
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.