Tlingit-Haida Regional Housing Authority et al v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development et al
| Tlingit-Haida Regional Housing Authority and Cook Inlet Housing Authority |
| United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Alphonso Jackson, Paula Blunt and Deborah Lalancette |
| 1:2008cv00451 |
| March 4, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Zita L. Weinshienk |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 25 U.S.C. ยง 4101 Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
93
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO DOCKET TRANSCRIPTS IN REFERENCED CASES: Clerk is directed to docket transcripts of all coordinated proceedings in each of the referenced actions, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 8/26/2014. (jsmit)
|
|
Filing
86
Final JUDGMENT by Clerk re 85 Order: Plaintiff is awarded its costs to be taxed upon the filing of a Bill of Costs pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1, by Clerk on 6/19/2014. (jsmit) Modified to ad "Final" on 6/19/2014 (jsmit).
|
|
Filing
74
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: defendants shall restore to the plaintiffs all funds that were illegally recaptured for fiscal years through and including FY 2008. The defendants' obligation to restore such funds is subject to the 6-year limitati ons period provided by 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a); with respect to grant funding for those fiscal years, HUD shall refrain from threatening recapture from the plaintiffs and shall not act upon any threatened recapture; on or before April 15, 2014, the plaintiffs in each civil action shall submit a proposed form of judgment, specifying the amounts to be paid to each tribe ortribal housing entity and the asserted sources of payment; and for any plaintiff who claims entitlement to payment for underfu nding because HUD excluded units from that plaintiff's FCAS in a particular fiscal year, the proposed form of judgment should include a separate itemization for those amounts and may be submitted by May 15, 2014. An Appendix may be provided to explain the calculation of the amount owed and the record support for the claim, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 3/7/2014. (rpmcd)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER granting 69 Defendants' Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Surreply to Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants Response to Plaintiffs Statement of Relief Requested, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 9/27/2013.(ervsl, )
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER Granting 55 re 52 Order: Plaintiff shall file its Statement of Relief Requested on or before March 4, 2013 and Defendants shall file their response to Plaintiff's Statement of Relief Requested, on or before May 6, 2013, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 12/26/2012. (rpmcd)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE re 51 : On or before December 19, 2012, simultaneous briefs shall be filed by the plaintiffs and defendants in the coordinated cases addressing factual and legal questions pertaining to HUD's authority to recap ture funds awarded in a previous grant year that the grant recipient spent on affordable housing activities. On or before January 18, 2013, plaintiffs in each case shall file a statement of the relief requested and the court's jurisdiction unde r the APA to grant such relief. Proposed supplements to the administrative record may be tendered. Defendants' responses to the plaintiffs' statements are due on or before March 19, 2013, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 11/19/2012. (rpmcd)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER REGARDING INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Memorandum Opinion and Order filed August 31, 2012, in Fort Peck Housing Authority v. HUD et al., Civil Action No. 05-cv-00018-RPM, is hereby incorporated as an order governing common iss ues in this action; it is FURTHER ORDERED that a coordinated hearing will held at a time to be scheduled for the purpose of addressing procedures for determining issues remaining in this action. All counsel representing the parties must be personally present at the hearing, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 8/31/2012. (rpmcd)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER FOR COORDINATED HEARING: will held at a time to be scheduled and all counsel representing the parties must be personally present at the hearing, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 4/16/2012. (rpmcd)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER for Consolidated Status Conference. Consolidated status conference will be held on July 23, 2010, at 2:00 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time in Courtroom A201, the Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. Because o f the geographical dispersion of plaintiffs' counsel, the conference will be held in a courtroom equipped to accommodate counsel who may wish to participate by telephone conference to avoid travel expense. Personal attendance is, of course, pref erred. Counsel who attend by telephone conference will call the court staff at 303-844-4627 by Monday, July 19, 2010, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to provide telephone numbers. The conference call will be initiated by the Courts staff, signed by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 7/6/2010. (rpmcd )
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER re: 10 the Joint Notice of Decision and Motion to Continue Stay. The parties shall file a joint status report within 30 days after the Tenth Circuit issues the mandate in Fort Peck Housing Auth. v. U.S. Dept of Housing and Urban Dev., Cross Appeal Case Nos. 06-1425 and 06-144. By Judge Zita L. Weinshienk on 03/08/2010. (sah, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
