Owner Can't Require HUD to Settle Section 8 Dispute

Facts: An owner participating in the Section 8 program asked a court to require the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to intervene in his city's “personal-vendetta-driven” administration of its Section 8 program. The owner claimed that city officials have forced his Section 8 residents to move out of his units and that Tucson officials approved two of his Section 8 contracts in 2010 before informing him shortly thereafter that they wouldn't be honored. Instead of suing those officials or the city of Tucson, the owner asked the court to force the Secretary of HUD to intervene.

Ruling: The D.C. district court denied the owner's request.

Reasoning: The rulings of other federal courts in previous cases brought by the owner preclude the owner from asserting a constitutional right to continued participation in Tucson's Section 8 program. That issue has already been decided, and this court wouldn't hear further arguments on this topic.

Second, the owner's request for a court order couldn't be granted, because this type of order requires that the owner have a clear and indisputable right to relief and there's no other adequate remedy available to him. Here, the owner, in seeking to enforce his May 2010 HAP contracts, has the alternate and more adequate remedy of filing a breach of contract claim against the Tucson Housing Agency, which is an actual party to the contracts, instead of requesting the aid of HUD.

• Konarski v. Donovan, May 2012