Garcia v. Washington County Department of Housing Services
United States District Court for the District of Oregon
2006 WL 897984 (2006)
- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
The Section 8 program was a federal program that provided financial assistance to low-income individuals so that they could rent housing from private landlords. Individuals who were approved for assistance received Section 8 vouchers from local housing agencies. Robert Garcia (plaintiff), a man with schizoaffective disorder, had a Section 8 voucher. Garcia needed care, which was provided by his brother. Garcia and his brother lived in a house owned by his brother. Garcia’s Section 8 voucher was used to pay his brother. Without Garcia’s Section 8 voucher, his brother could not afford to let Garcia live in his home, such that Garcia would not receive care. But an administrative rule prohibited Garcia from using his Section 8 voucher to pay his brother. Thus, the Washington County Department of Housing Services (department) (defendant) terminated Garcia’s Section 8 voucher. Garcia submitted a request for an accommodation, requesting that the department allow him to use his Section 8 voucher to pay his brother. The request was denied. Subsequently, Garcia brought suit, contending that the department violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The department filed a motion to dismiss. The district court took the motion under advisement.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mosman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.