Preview:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

CHAMBERS OF

J. FREDERICK MOTZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

101 WEST LOMBARD STREET BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201 (410) 962-0782 (410) 962-2698 FAX

November 13, 2008

Memo To Counsel Re: Irving Huang, et al. v. Housing Authority of Baltimore City Civil No. JFM-08-44 Dear Counsel: I have reviewed the memoranda submitted in connection with defendant's motion for summary judgment. The motion is granted. Because of the demands of my schedule, I do not have time to write a full opinion. Therefore, I will state the reasons for my decision in this letter. It assumes the reader has knowledge of the underlying facts. Please understand that the form of my opinion does not mean that I have not given serious considerations to the arguments you have made. As I indicated before, defendants' termination letters of August 24, 2007 could have been more carefully drafted. However, the record demonstrates that defendant had ample bases for terminating the contracts at the Denmore Avenue and Oakford Avenue complexes because of numerous deficiencies that prevented them from meeting minimum quality standards. Over a protracted period of time many of the deficiencies had been remediated. However, others including chipping paint at the Denmore Avenue complex (a particular serious problem) - had not been cured. Moreover, the fact that defendant took these deficiencies seriously is demonstrated by the fact that they had the properties inspected not only by Wesley Scriber but also by William Loehr and John Kelleher before the termination letters were sent. According to testimony given by Kelleher during the preliminary injunction hearing based upon his personal observations, "this place was in terrible, terrible, condition, unsafe condition, unsanitary condition and certainly did not and would not meet housing quality standards, which is the mandate that we must follow." In light of the responsibility that defendant has to Section 8 tenants to provide them with habitable housing, defendant acted entirely properly in terminating the contracts with Belle Properties. The summary judgment papers do not make clear whether plaintiff is asserting any claim based upon defendant's alleged wrongful imposition of quota limits upon the number of Section 8 tenants at the Denmore Avenue and Oakford Avenue complexes. However, if any such claim is being asserted, the record is clear that the placing of a high percentage of Section 8 tenants in the same building is inconsistent with one of the primary purposes of the Section 8 program: to deconcentrate poverty and to expand housing and economic opportunity. Finally, as to plaintiff's defamation claim, the record is clear that defendant did not

publish the allegedly defamatory statement - that plaintiff Huang had attempted to bribe Snipes to any third party. Rather, the only publication of that statement was made to plaintiffs themselves in the termination letters. Moreover, no cognizable damage resulted from defendant's conclusion that Huang had attempted to bribe Snipes in light of the fact, as stated earlier in this letter, defendant had sufficient cause to terminate the contracts with Belle Properties because of deficiencies that existed at the two complexes.1 A separate order granting defendant's motion for summary judgment is being entered herewith.

Very truly yours, /s/ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge

Plaintiff suggests that individual employees with defendant may have committed defamation by communicating erroneous information about the alleged bribe. Cf. DeLeon v. St. Joseph Hospital, Inc., 871 F.2d 1229 (4th Cir. 1989). However, these individuals are not named as defendants in this action. To the extent that plaintiff is requesting that the complaint be amended to add these individuals as defendants, the request is denied as untimely.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND IRVING HUANG v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF BALTIMORE CITY * * * Civil No. JFM-08-44 * * * ***** ORDER

For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum to counsel, it is, this 13th day of November 2008 ORDERED 1. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted; and 2. Judgment is entered in favor of defendant against plaintiffs.

/s/ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge



Download Irving Huang, et al. v.Housing Authority of Baltimore City.pdf

Maryland Law