Judge Paul Crotty
Through Section 8 enhanced vouchers, Junior and her co-plaintiffs stayed tenants after a building’s conversion from Mitchell-Lama to market-rate housing. They sought lease reformation, alleging illegality in 2011 recertifications increasing their rental shares. They also claimed New York City violated their due process rights by not conducting a hearing into the recertifications, that the city’s Housing Preservation Department (HPD) did not inform them of the consequences of their voucher participation, and that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) did not supervise the program’s administration. Dismissing the United States as immune, the court granted the city defendants judgment. HPD did not violate federal regulations for the Section 8 program’s implementation, nor did plaintiffs show entitlement to a protected property interest. Their assistance payments were not terminated, and the statute governing the voucher program created a permissible ceiling on tenants’ rental shares, which HPD followed. HPD also followed HUD’s directive prescribing the formula for calculating tenants’ shares of rent. Plaintiffs did not show how non-voucher tenants’ rents were relevant to their shares as voucher holders.
