Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GERMANTOWN COMMUNITY COUNCIL, INC. v. HUD

April 7, 1971

GERMANTOWN COMMUNITY COUNCIL, INC., et al.
v.
The DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT et al.


Hannum, District Judge.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: HANNUM

HANNUM, District Judge.

 This matter is before the court on a motion by the intervening defendants to vacate or amend this court's Order of January 15, 1970, as to them. The effect of the Order from which the intervening defendants seek relief is to maintain the status quo in the Central Germantown Urban Renewal Area pending a trial on the merits. The Order prohibits the voluntary or involuntary acquisition of property within the renewal area for purposes of the proposed Rittenhouse-Belfield Bypass. The intervening defendants contend in their motion that the effect of this prohibition has visited an extreme hardship upon them. A hearing was held, and as a result of which, the court makes the following:

 FINDINGS OF FACT

 1. The intervening defendants seeking relief from the January 15 Order are: Harry and Elizabeth Campbell; Willis Pryor and his wife; Arthur L. Sholl and his wife; Walter J. and Winifred Boileau; Francis Murray and his wife; Vider Roberson; Rose Peters; Robert Williams and his wife; Ollie Blair; Clay S. and Florence Brooks; Odessa Taylor; John H. Robinson and his wife, and Donald J. Stafford.

 2. The intervening defendants all reside in and own property in the area of the proposed Rittenhouse-Belfield Bypass.

 3. The intervening defendants desire to sell the property that they own in the area in question and relocate in a different area of the city.

 4. The intervening defendants have been, and are, unable to sell their homes for a fair price to anyone except the Redevelopment Authority.

 5. The Order of January 15, 1970, would force the intervening defendants to sell their homes to speculators for a fraction of their value.

 6. The intervening defendants do not desire to continue to live in the properties in the area in question because the neighborhood has become unsafe in that:

 (a) Many properties in the area have become vacant and abandoned or sold to the Redevelopment Authority and boarded up.

 (b) The vacant properties have become hideouts for gangs of teenagers and other persons with felonious or mischievous intentions.

 (c) Residents of the neighborhood are afraid to walk on the streets after dark because of the youths lurking in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.