Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 903 F.3d 32 (2018)

Citation
Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 903 F.3d 32 (2018)
Parent Document
Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 903 F.3d 32 (2018)
Effective Date
2018-08-31

Other Sections in This Document (144)

Full Text

649 chars
The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment,
and the District Court ruled in favor of Harvey. Hayes v.
Harvey, 186 F. Supp. 3d 427 (E.D. Pa. 2016). It reasoned that
Harvey was bound by the enhanced voucher statute by virtue
of the HAP contract and lease that he executed with the
Housing Authority and the family, respectively, but that the
statute did not require property owners to renew the leases of
enhanced voucher holders. Id. at 433–40. Accordingly,
Harvey was entitled to initiate proper eviction proceedings if
the family did not vacate the premises within a reasonable
period of time. Id. at 440. After Hayes and Fogle filed this