August 23, 2007: Settlement Imminent for Consolidated Appeals of HUD's Decisions upon Remand
After HUD requested Secretarial Reconsideration of OALJ's "Notices" asserting a "Lack of Jurisdiction" to issue a Final Order after the Seventh Circuit reversed (see "Do Your Job," below) Leslie Matlaw filed appeals of two separate Orders issued by the HUD Secretary and its Chief ALJ. These appeals assert that the Orders were not issued in conformity with the regulations and statutory guidelines, and are thus subject to collateral attack. The Seventh Circuit's Rule 33 Settlement Conference on August 28th on the now-consolidated cases will be attended by Leslie Matlaw (for Appellant Sheila White); appearing on behalf of ALJ Liberty and HUD Secretary Alfonso Jackson will be Christopher Wang, who argued the underlying liability appeal, as detailed below. In this case of first impressionn, Ms. White filed an Initial Jurisdictional Memorandum (this document is normally submitted with the Opening Brief but the thorny issues required immediate fuller explication). Shortly afterward, the Seventh Circuit Ordered further jurisdictional briefing be filed by August 31st.
HUD's Orders may indeed be valid, but absent the requisite judicial imprimatur, the Orders at issue could be without effect, thereby scuttling all of the Complaining Parties' achievements to date (among them, OALJ's watershed Damages award of $12,000, the highest to date issued in any HUD adjudication of otherwise-exempt discriminatory statements).
See the National fair Housing Advocate Online's Coverage detailing the issues posed [ http://www.fairhousing.com/index.cfm?method=page.display&pageid=3681 ],
Review the LINK to Sheila White's Initial Jurisdictional Memorandum, and
Watch for updates on Ms. White's Award's enforceability and the federal Courts' pronouncements of the mandatory procedures HUD must follow in remanded cases!
____________________________________________________________________
May 29, 2007: Single Mom tells Adminsitrative Law Judge and HUD Secretary: "Do Your Job"
In what is believed to be the first such case filed under the Fair Housing Act, a civil rights victim has filed suit in federal court, seeking issuance of the extraordinary Writ of Mandamus for HUD’s continuous failure of enforcement.
Mandamus is an infrequently-utilized common-law remedy (now codified in several statutes, among them, 28 U.S.C. Chapter 85 [Action to Compel an Officer of the United States to perform his duty]). Complainant Sheila White first filed her fair housing complaint with HUD in the Fall of 1998, when a landlord explicitly refused to show her an apartment because she is a single mother. HUD took three years to investigate the case, finally issuing its Charge of Discrimination in May of 2001, but instead of promptly concluding the Administrative Hearing process within six months as the statute and regulations require, now-retired HUD Administrative Law Judge Robert A. Andretta presided over the case for 999 days before issuing his Initial Decision dismissing Ms. White’s claims of having been subjected to discriminatory statements and intimidation, harassment, and retaliation for having lawfully asserted her civil rights through the administrative process.
The HUD Secretary declined to modify or reverse ALJ Andretta’s Initial Ruling, which became final by operation of law January 3, 2004. After securing the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s unanimous reversal on the facts early in February of this year, Ms. White contacted HUD several times, seeking its cooperation in filing a Motion with HUD’s Office of Administrative Law Judges to Issue a Final Ruling on her Damages and the Government's Civil Penalty.
But despite her fair housing rights having been upheld by the Court of Appeals, the Government continues to oppose her efforts. Christopher C. Wang, Counsel for the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Section (who vigorously opposed her appeal on the grounds that the landlord’s refusal was "ambiguous" and "not clearly attributable" despite the landlord’s own admission to the HUD investigator that she had, in fact, refused Ms. White because she had two children ("but no husband") has since argued to the Seventh Circuit that Ms. White should not be allowed to recoup the substantial cost of her appeal.
And last week, HUD’s Chief Administrative Law Judge Arthur A. Liberty ruled that HUD "lacked jurisdiction" to issue a Final Order, the last remaining step in Sheila White’s eight-year quest at HUD so that she can gain relief for the landlord’s strict liability discriminatory statements which "indicated disfavor for her familial status because her statements would allow an 'ordinary listener' to infer she had a preference against White due to her familial status." White v. HUD Secretary, 475 F. 3d 898, 908 (7th Cir. 2007).
Upon confirming that her Counsel had filed the Mandamus Petition naming Judge Liberty and HUD’s Secretary Alfonso Jackson, Sheila White responded, "When the lawyers came out of Judge Andretta’s chambers [at the Hearing], I heard him say, 'I've got real cases to work on, let’s get this over with.' I remember telling my lawyer when we rode down the elevator, 'I’ll go before Congress if I have to – HUD has been brushing me off to the side since Day One."
Ms. White’s Counsel has also filed a Motion before the Seventh Circuit advising of HUD’s failure to enforce the remand. For further information, see documents filed in Sheila White v. Chief ALJ Liberty and HUD Sec'y Jackson, Case Number 07-CV-2944 (N. Dist. Ill.) and White v. HUD Secretary, 475 F. 3d 898 (7th Cir. 2007) or contact Ms. White’s Counsel, Leslie V. Matlaw, P.C. at 312-804-3527.
(Excerpted from 5/29/07 edition of The National Fair Housing Advocate Online)http://www.fairhousing.com/index.cfm?method=page.display&pagename=releases_chicago_052907
