U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1988

Gonzalez v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corp.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided June 13, 1988 · Lumbard, Meskill, Winter

848 F.2d 391; 1988 WL 60036 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Scott A. Rosenberg, The Legal Aid Soc., New York City (John E. Kirklin, Director of Litigation, The Legal Aid Soc., New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs-appellants., Richard W. Mark, Asst. U.S. Atty., S.D. New York, New York City (Rudolph W. Giuliani, U.S. Atty. for the S.D. New York, Nancy Kilson, Asst. U.S. Atty., S.D. New York, New York City, John W. Herold, Asst. Gen. Counsel for Litigation, Joseph W. Lobue, Trial Atty., U.S. Dept, of Housing and Urban Development, New York City, of counsel), for Federal defendants-appellees., Joseph Polizzotto, New York City (Peter G. Bergmann, Paul G. Thomas, Susan A. Lifsey Portes, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corp.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Josefina Gonzalez v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corporation (2d Cir. 1988)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs-appellants, elderly or disabled tenants of a low-income congregate care facility in Manhattan operated by defendant-appellee St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corporation (St. Margaret’s), appeal from an order and final judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Leval, J., dated November 30,1987. Judge Leval had held that: (1) the mandatory meal charge imposed on tenants by St. Margaret’s did not constitute “rent” within the meaning of the “Brooke Amendment” to the United States Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(a)(1) (1982 & Supp. Ill 1985); (2) the Regulatory Agreement between the defendant-appellee United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and St. Margaret’s did not bar the meal charge; and (3) the tenants who refused to pay the mandatory meal charge were liable to St. Margaret’s for breach of contract.

We affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Leval in his opinion, Gonzalez v. St. Margaret’s House Housing Development Fund Corp., 668 F.Supp. 187 (S.D.N.Y. 1987).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.