Supreme Court Briefs
No. 00-1770
In the Supreme Court of the United States
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, PETITIONER
v.
PEARLIE RUCKER, ET AL.
OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY, ET AL., PETITIONERS
v.
PEARLIE RUCKER, ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOINT APPENDIX
THEODORE B. OLSON
Solicitor General
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
(202) 514-2217
Counsel of Record
for Petitioner
United States Department of
Housing and Urban
Development
GARY T. LAFAYETTE
SUSAN T. KUMAGAI
LAFAYETTE & KUMAGAI LLP
100 Spear Street
Suite #400
San Francisco CA 94105
(415) 357-4600
Counsel of Record
for Petitioners
Oakland Housing Authority
Harold Davis
PAUL RENNE
JAMES DONATO
WHITTY SOMVICHIAN
Cooley Godward LLP
One Maritime Plaza,
20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
(415) 693-2000
Counsel of Record
for Respondents
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FILED: MAY 24, 2001
CERTIORARI GRANTED: SEPTEMBER 25, 2001
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. 98-CV-781
PEARLIE RUCKER; HERMAN WALKER; WILLIE LEE;
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS; OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DEFENDANTS
Filed: Feb. 27, 1998
DOCKET ENTRIES
_________________________________________________
DOCKET
DATE NUMBER PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
2/27/98 1 COMPLAINT: No Summons(es) issued; Fee status ifpp entered on 2/27/98
[3:98-cv-00781] (mh)
* * * * *
_________________________________________________
DOCKET
DATE NUMBER PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
3/4/98 4 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT [1-1] by Plaintiff; adding plaintiffs Herman
Walker, Willie Lee, Barbara Hill, and defendants Oakland Housing Auth, HUD
[3:98-cv-00871] (mcl) [Entry date 03/05/98]
* * * * *
4/3/98 15 DECLARATION by Willie Lee on behalf of Plaintiffs re motion for
preliminary injunction [14-1] [3:98-cv-00781] (mcl) [Entry date 04/06/98]
4/3/98 16 DECLARATION by Barbara Hill on behalf of Plaintiffs re motion
for preliminary injunction [14-1] [3:98-cv-00781]
4/3/98 17 DECLARATION by Pearlie Rucker on behalf of Plaintiffs re motion
for preliminary injunction [14-1] [3:98-cv-00781]
_________________________________________________
DOCKET
DATE NUMBER PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
4/3/98 18 DECLARATION by Herman Walker on behalf of Plaintiffs re motion
for preliminary injunction [14-1] [3:98-cv-00781] (mcl) [Entry date 04/06/98]
* * * * *
4/17/98 29 DECLARATION by Ron Smith on behalf of defendant Harold Davis,
defendant Oakland Housing Auth in OPPOSITION to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary
injunction [14-1] [3:98-cv-00781] (mcl) [Entry date 04/02/98]
* * * * *
6/19/98 53 MEMORANDUM, ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION: by Judge Charles
R. Breyer granting in part and denying in part defendant Oakland Housing
Authority's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim [31-1] WITH 30
DAYS' LEAVE TO AMEND, granting in part and denying in part defendant
_________________________________________________
DOCKET
DATE NUMBER PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
Housing and Urban Development's motion to dismiss case [22-1] that defendant
Oakland Housing Authority, its officers, agents, servants . . . are preliminarily
enjoined, until further order of this Court, from terminating the leases
of tenants for drug-related criminal activity that does not occur within
the tenant's apartment until . . . that defendant OHA, its officers, agents,
servants . . . are preliminarily enjoined, until further order of this Court,
from prosecuting the Oakland -Piedmont-Emeryville Judicial District, Alameda
County eviction proceedings . . . (see document) (Date Entered: 6/24/98)
(cc: all counsel [3:98-cv-00781] (mcl) [Entry date 06/24/98]
* * * * *
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Nos. 98-16322 AND 98-16542
PEARLIE RUCKER; HERMAN WALKER; WILLIE LEE;
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES
v.
HAROLD DAVIS; OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
Filed: July 20, 1998
DOCKET ENTRIES
_________________________________________________
DATE PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
7/20/98 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL [98-16322]. *
* *
* * * * *
8/13/98 Filed original and 15 copies Appellant U.S. Dept. of HUD opening
brief * * *.
* * * * *
8/25/98 DOCKETED CASE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE of counsel [98-16542].
_________________________________________________
DATE PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
8/27/98 Filed order * * * These two appeals are related appeals from the
DC's preliminary inj order. Ninth Cir R 3-3 applies to these appeals. The
court sua sponte consolidates these appeals. * * *.
9/15/98 Filed original and 15 copies Appellant Harold Davis & Oakland
Housing * * *.
* * * * *
10/6/98 Received Amicus Center for The Community Interest brief * * *
* * * * *
10/28/98 Filed original and 15 copies appellees' 43 pages brief * * *
* * * * *
12/10/98 Filed original and 15 copies Harold Davis' & Oakland Housing
reply brief * * *
12/15/98 Filed original and 15 copies U.S. Dept. of HUD reply brief, * *
*
* * * * *
2/17/99 Filed original and 15 copies Appellees' supplemental brief in response
to amicus brief * * *
_________________________________________________
DATE PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
3/12/99 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED * * *
4/2/99 Filed order (Joseph T. Sneed, Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, William A.
FLETCHER): The parties are requested to file within 14 days of this order
briefs of not more than 3,500 words each discussing their respective positions
on the relevance of 21 USC 881(a)(7), as well as the amendments made thereto
by the Anti-Drug Act of 1988, to the interpretation of 45 USC 1437d(1)(5).
Specifically, is the "knowledge or consent of that owner" provision
in section 881(a)(7), relating to forfeitures, incorporated into section
1437d(1)(d), relating to leaseholds? * * *
4/16/99 Filed original and 15 copies Appellant U.S. Dept. of HUD's supplemental
brief of 7 pages * * *
4/16/99 Filed original and 15 copies Appellants Harold Davis & Oakland
Housing in 98-16542 supplemental brief of 7 pages * * *
4/16/99 Filed original and 15 copies Appellees' in 98-16322 supplemental
brief of 17 pages
* * *
2/14/00 FILED OPINION: The order granting the preliminary injunction is
REVERSED, and the preliminary injunction is VACATED.
* * *
_________________________________________________
DATE PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
* * * * *
8/18/00 Filed order FOR PUBLICATION (Procter R. HUG): Upon the vote of a
majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered
that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Cir.R. 35-3.
The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this
court or any district court of the 9th Cir., except to the extent adopted
by the en banc court.
* * *
* * * * *
9/15/00 Filed original and 20 copies Oakland Housing supplemental brief
* * *
9/18/00 Filed original and 15 copies Appellees Pearlie Rucker Herman Walker
Willie Lee, Barbara Hill supplemental brief * * *
* * * * *
9/19/00 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO Joseph T. SNEED, Mary M. SCHROEDER, Harry
PREGERSON, Stephen R. REINHARDT, Ferdinand F. FERNANDEZ, Thomas G. NELSON,
Michael D. HAWKINS, Barry G. SILVERMAN, M. M. MCKEOWN, Ronald M. GOULD,
Richard A. PAEZ * * *
_________________________________________________
DATE PROCEEDINGS
_________________________________________________
1/24/01 FILED OPINION: AFFIRMED * * *
* * * * *
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781 CRB
PEARLIE RUCKER, HERMAN WALKER, WILLIE LEE,
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS, OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DOES I-XXX, DEFENDANTS
[Filed: Mar. 4, 1998]
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
JURISDICTION
PLAINTIFFS PEARLIE RUCKER, HERMAN WALKER, WILLIE LEE and BARBARA HILL complain
against HAROLD DAVIS, OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND DOES I-XXX, and allege:
JURISDICTION
This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question
involving interpretation of federal statute) and 28 U.S.C. 1343 (deprivation
of civil rights)
INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
This matter is properly assigned to the Northern District of California,
Oakland Division, because the events took place in Oakland, Alameda County,
California, within the Oakland Division of the Northern District. (L-R 3-2
(d).)
PARTIES
1. PLAINTIFF PEARLIE RUCKER, HERMAN WALKER, WILLIE LEE AND BARBARA HILL
are citizens of the United States and reside in the State of California,
City of Oakland, Alameda County.
2. DEFENDANT HAROLD DAVIS is, and at all pertinent times was, the chief
of the Oakland Housing Authority. He is sued in his official capacity. DEFENDANT
OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY is the lessor of the homes in which the plaintiffs
reside in the City of Oakland. They administer these homes through a contract
with the DEFENDANT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
3. The identities of DEFENDANTS DOES 1-50 are unknown to PLAINTIFFS, who
request leave to amend this complaint when that information is obtained.
4. PLAINTIFFS are unaware of the identities and capacities of DOES 1-50
at this time, and request leave to amend this complaint when this information
is ascertained.
SUMMARY OF FACTS
PLAINTIFF PEARLIE RUCKER
5. PLAINTIFF PEARLIE RUCKER resides at 2005 E. 21st Street, Apt. 102, Oakland,
California (hereinafter, the Rucker Premises) under a written lease with
the lessor DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY, headed by DEFENDANT HAROLD
DAVIS. PLAINTIFF RUCKER is 63 years old, with no history of criminal violations
or drug use, and has resided in the premises since 1985. Residing at the
Rucker Premises is her daughter Gelinda Rucker and Gelinda's two daughters
and one granddaughter. Gelinda receives Supplemental Security Income benefits
for a mental disability she has had since birth. She is incapable of adequately
caring for herself or for her children. PLAINTIFF RUCKER is the primary
care giver for the entire family.
6. PLAINTIFF RUCKER's adult son, Michael Rucker, does not reside at the
Rucker Premises, and has not resided there since the early 1980s.
7. On December 31, 1997, DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY filed a complaint
alleging unlawful detainer of the Rucker Premises by PLAINTIFF RUCKER, in
the Municipal Court for the State of California, Alameda County, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, Oakland Housing Authority v. Rucker, Case #012528 (hereafter,
the Rucker complaint). The Rucker complaint sought, with other relief, termination
and forfeiture of PLAINTIFF RUCKER's lease, and her eviction. The primary
basis of this suit is that the PLAINTIFF violated the assurance that no
family members, guests, or other persons under her control would engage
in drug-related criminal activity on or near the premises.
8. Along with other allegations, the complaint alleges in substance:
On March 9, 1997, a Housing Authority officer on patrol in the 2200 block
of E. 19th Street (note: approximately three blocks from the Rucker Premises)
observed Gelinda drinking an alcoholic beverage in public. When the officer
contacted Gelinda, she attempted to conceal the alcohol. Gelinda appeared
to be under the influence and was arrested for being drunk in public. A
search of Gelinda revealed one rock of suspected cocaine and a crack cocaine
pipe. Gelinda gave Rucker's address as her residence.
On September 19, 1997, Oakland police officers on patrol in the 1400 block
of 23rd Avenue, Oakland (note: approximately eight blocks from the Rucker
premises) saw Michael loitering at a bus stop with a second man. Michael
was contacted and subsequently arrested for a warrant. When they searched
Michael, the officers found a piece of rock cocaine. Michael gave the Premises
as his residence.
9. This DEFENDANT and DEFENDANT DAVIS dismissed the complaint on February
17, 1998. However, these DEFENDANTS have indicated that they construe the
quoted lease provision to permit eviction of PLAINTIFF RUCKER irrespective
of Mrs. Rucker's personal involvement in, knowledge of, or actual ability
to prevent drug-related criminal activity. PLAINTIFF RUCKER has no control
over the acts of Michael Rucker, and is limited in her ability to control
the acts of Gelinda Rucker, due to Gelinda's mental disability.
10. For the past seven years, Pearlie Rucker has searched the room of Gelinda
Rucker looking for evidence of alcohol and drug use. She has never found
any drugs or drug paraphernalia. Pearlie Rucker has never seen Gelinda physically
manifest any sign of drug use. She has warned Gelinda and others that any
drug use or criminal activity on the premises can result in eviction. See
the Declaration of Pearlie Rucker.
PLAINTIFF HERMAN WALKER
11. PLAINTIFF HERMAN WALKER is 75 years old and disabled. The left side
of his body, particularly his left hand, is stiff and semi-paralyzed. He
is hard of hearing, has problems walking, usually needs a cane, and is periodically
put on oxygen due to shortness of breath. He is no longer capable of living
independently and requires an in-home health care taker.
12. PLAINTIFF WALKER resides at 1621 Harrison Street #1309, Oakland, California,
and has lived at his premises for 8 years. He lives in the "Senior
Housing" units of the Oakland Housing Authority. The unlawful detainer
action filed against him by the Oakland Housing Authority contains no allegations
that he personally engaged in drug-related criminal activity or that he
knew of such activity.
13. In later 1977, the DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY filed a complaint
alleging unlawful detainer of the Walker Premises by PLAINTIFF WALKER, in
the Municipal Court for the State of California, Alameda County, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, Oakland Housing Authority v. [Walker], Case #011040 (hereafter,
the Walker complaint). The Walker complaint sought, with other relief, termination
and forfeiture of PLAINTIFF RUCKER's lease, and his eviction. The primary
basis of this suit is that the PLAINTIFF violated the assurance that no
family members, guests, or other persons under his control would engage
in drug-related criminal activity on or near the premises.
14. Along with other allegations, the unlawful detainer complaint alleges:
On August 7, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers conducting a security
check at your complex, which is a senior citizen building, contacted Kelly
Shine. Shine, who was not a senior citizen and very fidgety showed signs
of being a narcotics user. Officers conducted [sic] Shine and a check was
conducted. Officers discovered that Shine is on probation with a search
clause for narcotics. Officers invoked the search privilege recovering one
rock of cocaine and a cocaine pipe. Shine was arrested for possession of
narcotics and paraphernalia. Shine told officers she was at your unit with
a friend who lived with you. You are the only resident listed on the lease.
Officers went to your unit and contacted you. You gave officers permission
to search your unit, and once inside they contacted Shine's minor child,
Shirley Hardaway, who was wearing a thin nightgown and appeared to be residing
in your unit, Marguerite Wise and Eleanor Randle, who has had several narcotics
arrests at your complex.
As officers searched your unit, they recovered a cardboard box inside your
bedroom containing a plate with suspected rock cocaine chips and four metal
crack cocaine pipes. Randle, who had a cocaine pipe pinned inside her jacket,
was arrested for possession of narcotics paraphernalia. In addition, officers
observed a large amount of women's clothing and personal items throughout
your unit. You denied that anyone was residing with you. A lease violation
was drafted.
A week later, August 12, 1997, OHA officers and your housing manager returned
to your unit to conduct a follow-up check. During the August 7 contact with
you, officers had observed a sign posted on your front door stating "oxygen
no smoking". However, your guests were smoking inside your unit. During
that contact officers also observed an oxygen machine and several oxygen
bottles. As officers and your manager entered your unit with your permission,
they again contacted Hardaway in your bedroom wearing a night gown and robe.
You again denied that Hardaway resided in your unit. Officers found a rock
cocaine pipe inside a bag of hair rollers. As officers informed you of the
paraphernalia you stated, you could not control what people brought into
your unit. A lease violation was drafted.
On October 11, 1997, Oakland Housing authority officers conducting a security
check inside your complex, contacted Eleanor Randle in the lobby area. Randle
told offices she had just left your unit and her friend Shirley Hardaway
was still inside your unit. Officers were aware of Randle's narcotics activity
and prior arrest at your unit. Officers contacted you in your unit and you
consented to a search. Once inside, officers contacted Shirley Hardaway
sitting on a sofa in your living room. Hardaway was asked to sit in another
area as officers conducted their search. In the creases of your sofa where
Hardaway had been sitting officers recovered a glass concaine pipe. Hardaway
admitted to using rock cocaine, but denied that the pipe belonged to her.
Hardaway was cited for possession of narcotics paraphernalia.
15. PLAINTIFF WALKER fired his in-home caretaker Eleanor Randle shortly
after he learned that she had been accused of drug activity in his apartment.
See the Declaration of Herman Walker. DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY's
eviction suit against PLAINTIFF WALKER is awaiting trial.
PLAINTIFF WILLIE LEE
16. Willie Lee is 71 years old and has been an Oakland Housing Authority
resident for 25 years. There is no allegation by Oakland Housing Authority
that she participated in any illegal drug activity or knew of any illegal
drug activity.
17. In early 1998, the DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY filed a complaint
alleging unlawful detainer of the Lee Premises by PLAINTIFF LEE, in the
Municipal Court for the State of California, Alameda County, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, Oakland Housing Authority v. Lee, Case #013197 (hereafter,
the Lee complaint). The Lee complaint sought, with other relief, termination
and forfeiture of PLAINTIFF LEE's lease, and her eviction. The primary basis
of this suit is that the PLAINTIFF violated the assurance that no family
members, guests, or other persons under her control would engage in drug-related
criminal activity on or near the premises.
18. Along with other allegations, the complaint alleges:
On November 6, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers responding to complaints
of individuals using narcotics and loitering in the parking lot area of
the complex, contacted your grandson Robert Lee, who is listed on your lease
as a resident. As officers approached, Lee discarded a marijuana cigarette.
He was informed of the complaint and admitted to smoking marijuana. A search
of Lee's left front jacket revealed a ziplock baggie containing marijuana.
Lee was cited for possession of marijuana.
19. The complaint did not allege that PLAINTIFF WILLIE LEE was personally
guilty of, or had any prior knowledge of the illegal drug activity alleged
in the complaint as the basis for the eviction.
20. PLAINTIFF LEE has warned her household that any drug use or criminal
activity on the premises can result in eviction. See the Declaration of
Willie Lee. DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY's eviction suit against
PLAINTIFF LEE is awaiting trial.
PLAINTIFF BARBARA HILL
21. PLAINTIFF BARBARA HILL is 63 years old and has lived at her premises
for approximately 30 years. There is no allegation by Oakland Housing Authority
that she participated in any illegal drug activity or knew of any illegal
drug activity.
22. In early 1998, the DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY filed a complaint
alleging unlawful detainer of the Hill Premises by PLAINTIFF HILL, in the
Municipal Court for the State of California, Alameda County, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, Oakland Housing Authority v. Hill, Case #013198 (hereafter,
the Hill complaint). The Hill complaint sought, with other relief, termination
and forfeiture of PLAINTIFF HILL's lease, and her eviction. The primary
basis of this suit is that the PLAINTIFF violated the assurance that no
family members, guests, or other persons under her control would engage
in drug-related criminal activity on or near the premises.
23. Along with other allegations, the complaint alleges:
On November 6, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers responding to complaints
of individuals using narcotics and loitering in the parking lot area of
the complex, contacted your grandson Donte McPherson, who is listed on your
lease as a resident. As officers approached, one of the individuals with
your grandson discarded a suspected marijuana cigarette. McPherson was informed
of the complaint and admitted to smoking marijuana. A lease violation was
submitted.
24. PLAINTIFF HILL has warned her household that any drug use or criminal
activity on the premises can result in eviction. See the Declaration of
Barbara Hill. DEFENDANT OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY's eviction suit against
PLAINTIFF HILL is awaiting trial.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL PLAINTIFFS
25. All of the PLAINTIFFS have written leases with the DEFENDANT OAKLAND
HOUSING AUTHORITY. Each of the PLAINTIFFS has been sued by this DEFENDANT
based on the allegation that drug-related criminal activity has been committed
by one of their family or household members on or near the premises.
26. None of these unlawful detainer actions allege that the PLAINTIFFS had
any prior knowledge of the alleged drug-related criminal activity or that
the PLAINTIFFS personally engaged in drug-related criminal activity.
27. The PLAINTIFFS did not engage in such activity, nor did they have any
knowledge of it occurring in the home or on the premises, nor did they permit
its occurrence. Each of them denied participation or knowledge of such activity
in their answers to the unlawful detainer complaints and in the Declarations
submitted in this action.
28. Each of the plaintiffs also informed all of their household members
that drug-related criminal activity is not permitted in their home or on
the premises. Herman Walker, who lives alone, informed his family members,
his caretakers, and his guests.
29. Each of the unlawful detainer complaints alleges that one of the Plaintiffs
violated the following portions of the lease agreement:
Paragraph 9: m. To assure that tenant, any member of the household, a guest,
or another person under the tenant's control, shall not engage in:
(i) Any criminal activity that threatens the health, safety or right to
peaceful enjoyment of the premises by other public housing residents, or
threatens the health and safety of the housing authority employees . . .
(ii) Any drug-related criminal activity on or near the premises . . .
30. These lease terms were mandated by the DEFENDANT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, which issued 24 C.F.R. 966.4(f)(12), which
mandates that all public housing authority leases contain a clause stating
that the leaseholders "assure" that the "tenant, members
of the tenant's household, guests, or other persons under the tenant's control"
will not engage in "drug-related criminal activity on or near the premises,"
and that any violation of this assurance will be the basis for violation.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(42 U.S.C. 1983)
31. PLAINTIFFS incorporate by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1-30,
above.
32. By their acts and omissions, working in concert, DEFENDANTS have acted
under color of state law in violating and threatening to further violate
PLAINTIFFS' rights under the United States Constitution, as well as the
provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1437, et seq. Accordingly, PLAINTIFF RUCKER seeks
declaratory relief as prayed for below, and PLAINTIFFS WALKER, HILL and
LEE seek injunctive relief and declaratory relief as prayed for below.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(5 U.S.C. 701, et seq.)
33. PLAINTIFFS incorporate by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1-32,
above.
34. DEFENDANT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
has violated the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 701-706) by acts
or omissions that are inconsistent with the applicable statutory and regulatory
provisions. Such acts include the issuance of 24 C.F.R. 966.4(f)(12). Accordingly,
PLAINTIFF RUCKER seeks declaratory relief as prayed for below, and PLAINTIFFS
WALKER, HILL and LEE injunctive relief and declaratory relief as prayed
for below.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(42 U.S.C. 2101, et seq.)
35. PLAINTIFFS incorporate by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1-34,
above.
36. The Americans With Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. Chapter 126) protects
disabled persons from discrimination in public accommodations. PLAINTIFF
HERMAN WALKER and PLAINTIFF PEARLIE RUCKER's daughter Gelinda are both "disabled"
as defined in 42 U.S.C. 12102(2).
37. 42 U.S.C. 12312 provides that "no qualified individual with a disability
shall by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or
be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public
entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity." 42 U.S.C.
§ 12132.
38. Discrimination includes: "Failure to make reasonable accommodations
in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary
to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations
to individuals with disabilities." 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii).
These obligations are specifically applied by regulation to public housing
agencies such as the Oakland Housing Authority. See, 24 C.F.R. Subtitle
A Part 9.
39. Discrimination also includes: ". . . to deny goods, services, facilities,
privileges, advantages, accommodations, or other opportunities to an individual
because of the known disability of an individual with whom the individual
is known to have a relationship or association." 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(1)(E).
40. This statutory scheme requires DEFENDANTS DAVIS and OAKLAND HOUSING
AUTHORITY to make the reasonable accommodation of exempting PLAINTIFF WALKER
and PLAINTIFF RUCKER from Lease Paragraph 9. Evicting PLAINTIFF WALKER and
PLAINTIFF RUCKER for failure to comply with the Lease Paragraph 9-where
the physically cannot comply due to his physical disabilities, and she is
a homemaker raising her mentally disabled daughter's children but unable
to control the daughter's actions when outside the premises-constitutes
deprivation of housing based on disability and discrimination in violation
of the ADA.
41. This statutory scheme also requires that DEFENDANT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT make reasonable accommodations in the regulatory
scheme to accommodate these PLAINTIFFS. PLAINTIFF RUCKER seeks declaratory
relief and PLAINTIFF WALKER seeks injunctive and declaratory relief as set
forth below.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Illegal contract)
42. PLAINTIFFS incorporate by reference the allegations in Paragraph 1-41,
above.
43. The leases provided to PLAINTIFFS by the DEFENDANT DAVIS and OAKLAND
HOUSING AUTHORITY constitute a contract of adhesion, and contains unconscionable
contractual terms. Hence, these leases are illegal and unenforceable.
PRAYER
PLAINTIFFS seek the following injunctive relief from the court:
1. Preliminary injunctive relief ordering the Defendant Davis and Oakland
Housing Authority to cease and desist, now and in the future, from all attempts
to conduct evictions without good cause, founded on allegations and proof
of such good cause, and of the tenant's personal participation in, prior
knowledge of, and actual ability to prevent drug-related or other criminal
activity;
2. Preliminary injunctive relief requiring the Oakland Housing Authority
to exempt Herman Walker and Pearlie Rucker from Lease Paragraph 9, pursuant
to the mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. Section
12312, et seq.) to make "reasonable accommodations" to people
with disabilities.
3. Preliminary injunctive relief halting the state court eviction cases
in Oakland Housing Authority v. Walker, action 011040, Oakland Housing Authority
v. Hill, action 013198; and Oakland Housing Authority v. Lee, action 013197;
all in the Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville Judicial District, Alameda County,
State California; until the issues in this suit are resolved.
4. Preliminary injunctive relief staying the enforcement of 24 C.F.R. 966.4(f)(12)
on statutory and constitutional grounds; this regulation mandates that all
OHA leases contain a clause stating that the leaseholders "assure"
that the "tenant, member of the tenant's household, guests, or other
persons under the tenant's control" will not engage in "drug-related
criminal activity on or near the premises", and that any violation
of this assurance will be the basis for eviction.
5. Preliminary injunctive relief staying enforcement of any provision in
HUD and OHA leases and contracts that permits evictions based on drug-related
or other criminal activity to be conducted without good cause, that is founded
on allegations and proof of such good cause, and on the tenant's personal
participation in, prior knowledge of, and actual ability to prevent drug-related
or other criminal activity;
6. A declaration that 24 C.F.R. 966.4(f)(12) is both illegal and unconstitutional;
7. A declaration that DEFENDANTS DAVIS and the OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY
must cease and desist, now and in the future, from all attempts to conduct
evictions based on drug-related or other criminal activity without good
cause, founded on allegations and proof of such good cause, that a tenant
personally participated in, had prior knowledge of, and the actual ability
to prevent criminal activity on the premises.
8. A declaration that the acts and omissions of DEFENDANTS constitutes violations
of the United States Constitution and the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1437,
et seq.
9. Attorneys' fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988, 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.,
and California Civil Code 1717, and
10. Costs of this action;
11. Such other relief as the Court deems just and equitable.
Dated: March 3, 1998
/s/ WILLIAM M. SIMPICH
WILLIAM M. SIMPICH
Attorney for PLAINTIFF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781
PEARLIE RUCKER, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
[Filed Apr. 17, 1998]
Date: May 8, 1998
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Ctrm: 8
DEFENDANTS HAROLD DAVIS AND OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY'S REQUEST FOR
JUDICIAL NOTICE
Defendants HAROLD DAVIS and Oakland Housing Authority ("OHA"),
by and through their attorneys, hereby request the Court to take judicial
notice pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201 of the following facts:
1. Plaintiffs' counsel in the instant case, Mr. John Murcko, also represented
the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the OHA entitled Alice Oliver et al.
v. Oakland Housing Authority et al., Alameda County Municipal Court No.
574817, ("Oliver v. OHA") wherein Mr. Murcko alleged that OHA's
public housing constituted a nuisance as a result of "lack of security
for tenants by the allowance of drug dealers." (A true and correct
copy of the First Supplemental Complaint for Damages dated January 27, 1997
in that matter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". See Paragraph
32, subparagraph g, page 15 therein for the reference to drug dealers.)
2. During the deposition of Patricia Blackwell, one of the public housing
tenant-plaintiffs in the Oliver v. OHA matter, on January 3, 1997, Mr. Murcko
stated,
The law is that a landlord has to provide security. If there's drug problems,
the law says the landlord has to eliminate that problem. That's the law
ma'am. That is the law. [Blackwell Depo. 45:11-14]
3. The deponent, Ms. Blackwell, indicated that as a tenant of public housing,
she would like to see OHA take action to rid public housing of tenants who
are dealing drugs, as follows,
Q: What do you expect OHA, your landlord, to do about drug dealers?
. . .
A: I expect them to have them removed. [Blackwell Depo. 47:14-18]
4. True and correct copies of relevant pages of the deposition transcript
of Patricia Blackwell are attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The
original of this deposition transcript has been lodged with the Court and
is part of the file Oliver v. OHA.
Dated: April 16, 1998 Respectfully sumbitted
LAFAYETTE, KUMAGAI &
CLARKE
/s/ SUSAN T. KUMAGAI
SUSAN T. KUMAGAI
Attorneys for Defendants
HAROLD DAVIS and OAKLAND
HOUSING AUTHORITY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781 CRB
PEARLIE RUCKER; HERMAN WALKER; WILLIE LEE
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS; OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DOES I-XXX, DEFENDANTS
[DATE: May 8, 1998
TIME: 10 a.m.
DEPT.: 8 [illegible] Fl.]
DECLARATION OF BARBARA HILL IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DECLARATION OF BARBARA HILL
I, Barbara Hill, depose and say;
1. I am a tenant at 5120 Shafter Ave. #1, in Oakland, CA 94618. I am 63
years old. I have been a tenant there for about 30 years.
2. My landlord is the Oakland Housing Authority.
3. I have been served a summons and complaint in an unlawful detainer action,
Oakland Housing Authority v. [Hill], case #013198, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, seeking my eviction.
4. The unlawful detainer complaint alleges that:
On November 6, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers responding to complaints
of individuals using narcotics and loitering in the parking lot area of
the complex, contacted your grandson Donte McPherson, who is listed on your
lease as a resident. As officers approached, one of the individuals with
your grandson discarded a suspected marijuana cigarette. McPherson was informed
of the complaint and admitted to smoking marijuana. A lease violation was
submitted.
5. I have answered the unlawful detainer complaint denying the allegations.
6. The complaint does not allege that I had any prior knowledge of the alleged
criminal activity or that I personally engaged in criminal activity, which
is the basis of the eviction action.
7. I did not engage in any criminal drug activity. I had no knowledge of
any criminal drug activity occuring on the premises. I did not permit activity
or cause other others to engage in activity, because I had no knowledge
of any activity.
8. I have informed the members of my household numerous times that no drug
related or criminal activity is permitted in my home or on the premises.
I declare that the preceding is true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and recollection under the penalty of perjury. Executed in Oakland on February
26, 1998.
/s/ BARBARA HILL
BARBARA HILL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781 CRB
PEARLIE RUCKER; HERMAN WALKER; WILLIE LEE
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS; OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DOES I-XXX, DEFENDANTS
[DATE: May 8, 1998
TIME: 10 a.m.
DEPT.: 8 [illegible] Fl.]
DECLARATION OF WILLIE LEE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DECLARATION OF WILLIE LEE
I, Willie Lee, depose and say;
1. I am a tenant at 5120 Shafter Ave. #4, in Oakland, CA 94618. I am 71
years old. I have been a tenant there for about 25 years.
2. My landlord is the Oakland Housing Authority.
3. I have been served a summons and complaint in an unlawful detainer action,
Oakland Housing Authority v. Lee, case #013197, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, seeking my eviction.
4. The unlawful detainer complaint alleges that:
On November 6, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers responding to complaints
of individuals using narcotics and loitering in the parking lot area of
the complex, contacted defendant's grandson Robert Lee, who is listed on
defendant's lease as a resident. As officers approached, Lee discarded a
suspected marijuana cigarette. He was informed of the complaint and admitted
to smoking marijuana. A search of Lee's left front jacked [sic] revealed
a ziplock baggie containing marijuana. Lee was cited for possession of marijuana.
5. I have answered the unlawful detainer complaint denying the allegations.
6. The complaint does not allege that I had any prior knowledge of the alleged
criminal activity or that I personally engaged in criminal activity, which
is the basis of the eviction action.
7. I did not engage in any criminal drug activity. I had no knowledge of
any criminal drug activity occuring on the premises. I did not permit activity
or cause other others to engage in activity, because I had no knowledge
of any activity.
8. I have informed all of the members of my household that drug related
activity and criminal activity is not permitted in my home or on the premises.
I declare that the preceding is true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and recollection under the penalty of perjury. Executed in Oakland on February
26, 1998.
/s/ WILLIE LEE
WILLIE LEE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781 CRB
PEARLIE RUCKER; HERMAN WALKER; WILLIE LEE
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS, OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DOES I-XXX, DEFENDANTS
[DATE: May 8, 1998
TIME: 10 a.m.
DEPT.: 8 [illegible] Fl.]
DECLARATION OF HERMAN WALKER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DECLARATION OF HERMAN WALKER
I, Herman Walker, depose and say;
1. I am a tenant at 1621 Harrison Street #1309, in Oakland, CA 94612. I
am 75 years old. I am disabled. My feet swell, my legs, my back, and my
neck are in poor condition. I have arthritis. I have problems with my stomach.
I have problems walking and usually need a cane. I have been periodically
put on oxygen due to shortness of breath. The left side of my body, particularly
my left hand, is stiff and semi-paralyzed. When I get upset or when I am
under stress, I sometimes cannot remember what I am saying, and I suffer
from disorientation, and confusion. I am hard of hearing. I am no longer
capable of living independently and I require an in-home health care taker.
2. My landlord is the Oakland Housing Authority.
3. I have been served a summons and complaint in an unlawful detainer action,
Oakland Housing Authority v. Walker, case #011040, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, seeking my eviction.
4. The unlawful detainer complaint alleges that:
On August 7, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers conducting a security
check at your complex, which is a senior citizen building, contacted Kelly
Shine. Shine, who was not a senior citizen and very fidgety showed signs
of being a narcotics user. Officers contacted Shine and a check was conducted.
Officers discovered that Shine is on probation with a search clause for
narcotics. Officers invoked the search privilege recovering one rock of
cocaine and a cocaine pipe. Shine was arrested for possession of narcotics
and paraphernalia. Shine told officers she was at your unit with a friend
who lived with you. You are the only resident listed on your lease. Officers
went to your unit and contacted you. You gave officers permission to search
your unit, and once inside they contacted Shine's minor child, Shirley Hardaway,
who was wearing a thin nightgown and appeared to be residing in your unit,
Marguerite Wise and Eleanor Randle, who has had several narcotics arrests
at your complex.
As officers searched your unit, they recovered a cardboard box inside your
bedroom containing a plate with suspected rock cocaine chips and four metal
crack cocaine pipes. Randle, who had a cocaine pipe pinned inside her jacket,
was arrested for possession of narcotics paraphernalia. In addition, officers
observed a large amount of women's clothing and personal items throughout
you unit. You denied that anyone was residing with you. A lease violation
was drafted.
A week later, August 12, 1997, OHA officers and your housing manager returned
to your unit to conduct a follow-up check. During the August 7 contact with
you, officers had observed a sign posted on your front door stating "oxygen
no smoking." However, your guests were smoking inside your unit. During
that contact officers also observed an oxygen machine and several oxygen
bottles. As officers and your manager entered your unit with your permission,
they again contacted Hardaway in your bedroom wearing a night gown and robe.
You again denied that Hardaway resided in your unit. Officers found a rock
cocaine pipe inside a bag of hair rollers. As officers informed you of the
paraphernalia you stated, you could not control what people brought into
your unit. A lease violation was drafted.
On October 11, 1997, Oakland Housing Authority officers conducting a security
check inside your complex, contacted Eleanor Randle in the lobby area. Randle
told officers she had just left your unit and her friend Shirley Hardaway
was still inside your unit. Officers were aware of Randle's narcotic activity
and prior arrest at your unit. Officers contacted you in your unit and you
consented to a search. Once inside, officers contacted Shirley Hardaway
sitting on a sofa in your living room. Hardaway was asked to sit in another
area as officers conducted their search. In the creases of your sofa where
Hardaway had been sitting officers recovered a glass cocaine pipe. Hardaway
admitted to using rock cocaine, but denied that the pipe belonged to her.
Hardaway was cited for possession of narcotics paraphernalia.
5. I have informed all of my family members, my caretakers, and my guests,
that drug related activity and criminal activity are not permitted in my
home or on the premises.
6. The complaint does not allege that I had any prior knowledge of the alleged
criminal activity or that I personally engaged in criminal activity, which
is the basis of the eviction action.
7. I have answered the complaint denying the allegations.
8. My in-home caretaker was Eleanor Randle. I fired her shortly after I
learned that she had been accused of drug activity in my apartment.
9. I did not engage in any criminal drug activity. I had no knowledge of
any criminal drug activity occuring on the permises. I did not permit activity
or cause other others to engage in activity, because I had no knowledge
of any activity.
I declare that the preceding is true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and recollection under the penalty of perjury. Executed in Oakland on March
2, 1998.
/s/ HERMAN WALKER
HERMAN WALKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781 CRB
PEARLIE RUCKER, HERMAN WALKER, WILLIE LEE
AND BARBARA HILL, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS, OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, DOES I-XXX, DEFENDANTS
[DATE: May 8, 1998
TIME: 10 a.m.
DEPT.: 8 [illegible] Fl.]
DECLARATION OF PEARLIE RUCKER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DECLARATION OF PEARLIE RUCKER
I, Pearlie Rucker, depose and say;
1. I am a tenant at 2005 East 21st Street #102, Oakland CA 94606. I am 63
years old. I have been a tenant there for about 21 years.
2. My landlord is the Oakland Housing Authority.
3. I have been served a summons and complaint in an unlawful detainer action,
Oakland Housing Authority v. Rucker, case #012528, Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville
Judicial District, seeking my eviction.
4. The unlawful detainer complaint alleges that:
On March 9, 1997, and Oakland Housing Authority officer on patrol in the
2200 block of E. 19th Street, observed defendant's daughter Gelinda Rucker,
who is listed on defendant's lease as a resident, drinking an alcoholic
beverage in public. When the officer contacted Rucker she attempted to conceal
the alcohol. Rucker, who was near defendant's complex, appeared to be under
the influence and was arrested for being drunk in public. A search of Rucker
revealed one rock of suspected cocaine and a crack cocaine pipe. She was
additionally charged with possession of narcotics and paraphernalia. Rucker
listed defendant's address as her residence.
On September 19, 1997, Oakland police officers on patrol in the 1400 block
of 23rd Avenue, which is an area high in use and sale of narcotics, observed
defendant's son Michael Rucker and William Knight loitering at a bus stop.
Rucker was contacted and subsequently arrested for a warrant. As officers
searched Rucker, they recovered a piece of rock cocaine. He was additionally
charged with possession of narcotics. Rucker, who is not listed on defendant's
lease as a resident, listed defendant's address as his residence.
5. I have answered the unlawful detainer complaint denying the allegations.
6. My son, Michael Rucker, has not lived with me since the early 1980's.
7. My daughter, Gelinda Rucker, is severely mentally disabled. She was born
with a mental disability. She started seeing a psychiatrist when she was
13 or 14 years old. The doctor said she had to be on regular medication.
She began taking a medication which the doctor prescribed, I think it was
prozac. She is incapable of caring for herself or for her children. As a
result, I am the primary caregiver for my grandchildren. For her mental
disability, my daughter receives SSI. About seven years ago I suspected
my daughter had an alcohol problem based on physical observation, and I
had her placed in a residential drug and alcohol treatment program. When
she got out of the program, I thought she had been cured. When I first suspected
that she had an alcohol problem, I began searching her room when I cleaned
it, about once or twice a week, for any evidence of drug or alcohol problems.
I have continued to do so over the last 7 years or so, up through the present.
I have never found any drugs or drug paraphernalia. I have found beer cans
and occasionally a wine bottle. Prior to her recent arrest, I never observed
any physical signs of drug use. She is presently incarcerated and in a drug
program.
8. The complaint does not allege that I had any prior knowledge of the alleged
criminal activity or that I personally engaged in criminal activity, which
is the basis of the eviction action.
9. I did not engage in any criminal drug activity. I had no knowledge of
any criminal drug activity occuring on the premises. I did not permit activity
or cause other others to engage in activity, because I had no knowledge
of any activity.
10. I have informed all of my family members that drug related activity
is not permitted in my home or on the premises.
I declare that the preceding is true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and recollection under the penalty of perjury. Executed in Oakland on March
3, 1998.
/s/ PEARLIE RUCKER
PEARLIE RUCKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C-98-00781
PEARLIE RUCKER, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD DAVIS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
Filed: Apr. 17, 1998
DECLARATION OF RON SMITH
IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS'
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I, Ron Smith, declare:
1. I am a Housing Manager for the Western District of defendant Oakland
Housing Authority ("OHA"). I make this declaration of my own personal
knowledge and can competently testify thereto if called as a witness.
2. I manage OHA's apartments located at 2005 East 21st Street, Apt. 102,
Oakland, including, the apartment leased by plaintiff, Pearlie Rucker.
3. Ms. Rucker has signed a lease, which at Paragraph 9, details the obligations
of the tenant and his or her guests and members of household, in pertinent
part:
Tenant is also responsible for causing members of her household and guests
to comply with the following: . . .
m. To assure that tenant, any member of the household, a guest, or another
person under the tenant's control, shall not engage in: (i) Any criminal
activity that threatens the health, safety, or right to peaceful enjoyment
of the premises by other public housing residents, . . . (ii) Any drug-related
criminal activity on or near the premises (e.g., manufacture, sale, distribution,
use, or possession of illegal drugs or drug paraphernalia, etc.)
(A true and correct copy of Ms. Rucker's lease is attached hereto as Exhibit
"A".)
4. Paragraph 12 of the lease provides OHA with a right to inspect the units,
as follows:
c. Management may enter tenant's dwelling unit as follows:
1) Management shall provide Tenant with two days written notice stating
the purpose of its entry to the dwelling unit. Management entry shall be
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. for the purpose of performing
routine inspections and maintenance and for making repairs and improvements.
2) Management may enter the premises at any time without advance notification
when there is a reasonable cause to believe an emergency exists.
5. Inspections of units are conducted when, among other things, tenants
are suspected of lease violations, including violations of Paragraph 9.
6. As far as I am aware, all leases, including those of private landlords,
include provisions similar to Paragraph 12, allowing the landlord/housing
manager to inspect its property under like circumstances.
7. In addition to executing the lease, on a yearly basis, Ms. Rucker signs
a form entitled "Occupant's Responsibility," which provides, in
pertinent part:
As I am the lessee of this apartment, I am responsible for all damages and
the conduct of all activities in my apartment. Should I violate the terms
and conditions of my lease, I am aware that I could be subject to legal
action.
(A true and correct copy of the Occupant's Responsibility form most recently
executed by Ms. Rucker is attached hereto as Exhibit "B".)
8. Further, Ms. Rucker signs a yearly form entitled "Tenant Agreement
To Maintain Drug-Free Environment," which provides, in pertinent part:
I am aware of the fact that Paragraph 9, Section m, of my lease specifically
prohibits me, my household members or guest from using, selling or possessing
any illegal drugs or drug paraphernalia on the Oakland Housing Authority
(OHA) property. I also understand that if I or any member of my household
or guest should violate this lease provision, I may face eviction action
against me to terminate my tenancy with the Housing Authority.
(A true and correct copy of the Tenant Agreement To Maintain Drug-Free Environment
form most recently executed by Ms. Rucker is attached hereto as Exhibit
"C".)
9. When an apartment is vacated, OHA leases the apartment to the next person
listed on a prioritized waiting list.
10. If an inspection of an apartment is conducted on the basis that a tenant
and/or guest and/or member of the household is believed to be in violation
of Paragraph 9, section m, by using, selling or possessing any illegal drugs
or drug paraphernalia on OHA property, that inspection is done for the purpose
of determining violations of the lease, and not for purposes of investigating
and/or prosecuting for any criminal conduct.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California
that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed
on April 16, 1998 in the city of Oakland, County of Alameda, California.
/s/ RON SMITH
RON SMITH
OHA\RUCK\SMITH.DEC
DECLARATION OF RON SMITH
C-98-00781
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF
OAKLAND CALIFORNIA
TENANT LEASE
Name of Tenant PEARLINE D. RUCKER
Account/Client No. 230581/408468_
Tenant _________________
Dwelling Unit No. 102______________
Number of Bedrooms (Unit Size) 4_____
Address 2005 E 21st Street #102,
Oakland, CA 94606-4270
Monthly Rent $ 261.00
Effective Date: February 1, 1997
The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland, California (Management) leases
to PEARLINE D. RUCKER (Tenant), the dwelling unit described above under
the terms and conditions stated within this lease. Except where otherwise
indicated, the term "dwelling unit" refers to the apartment unit
and adjacent area assigned for the Tenant's exclusive use and to the area(s)
assigned in paragraph 10 of this lease.
1. TERM OF THE LEASE
This lease is for a period of one calendar month.
2. RENEWAL OF LEASE
This lease shall automatically renew each calendar month, unless terminated
by either Management or Tenant as provided in this lease.
3. MEMBERS OF HOUSEHOLD
Only the following persons may live in the dwelling unit with the named
Tenant:
Name Date of Birth Social Security #
RUCKER, GELINDA 05/16/54
573-21-2526
FLETCHER, JACQUELINE 06/15/78
548-69-3773
ROBINSON, LATASHA 05/15/82
557-75-8995
4. USE OF THE DWELLING UNIT BY MEMBERS OF THE HOUSEHOLD
No one other than those persons listed above may live in the dwelling unit
for more than fourteen (14) days with the Tenant. (See paragraph 7.) Tenant
is responsible for notifying Management of any change in his/her household
within fourteen (14) days after the change occurs.
5. PAYMENTS DUE UNDER THE LEASE
a. Rental Payments
1) The first rent payment for the period beginning ____, 19___, and ending
____, 19__, is $___. This payment is due at the time this lease is signed.
2) The monthly rent of $ 261.00 is due on or before the first of each month
beginning February 1, 1997. This month rent may change for reasons stated
in Paragraph 6 of this lease.
3) The Tenant shall be responsible for rent for thirty (30) days after they
give written notice of their intent to vacate; or in the absence of such
written notice, for thirty (30) days from the day Management learns of the
vacancy. If the end of this thirty (30) day period does not coincide with
the end of a month, the rent due under this provision shall be prorated
at a daily charge of 1/30 of the monthly rent amount.
4) If Tenant is transferring from one Oakland Housing Authority apartment
to another, any charges due under the previous leases are due under this
lease.
b. Utilities
Management shall pay the full cost of the following utilities and services:
1) Water, garbage collection, sewer service
2) The following will be provided or furnished
by Management
YES NO YES NO
o " Gas o " Gas Range
o " Electricity o " Electric Range
o " Heat o " Refrigerator
Tenant is responsible for the provision and payment of the full cost of
any other utilities used. Management is not responsible for failure to furnish
utilities by reason of any cause beyond its control.
c. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR CHARGES
Tenant shall pay such charges for the repair of those damages which are
beyond normal wear and tear to the dwelling unit, development buildings,
facilities or common areas and for the cleaning and extermination made necessary
by the action(s) or neglect of the Tenant, members of the household or guests.
All charges shall be billed according to the Schedule of Charges for Services
or Repairs posted in the District and Central Management offices. The Charge
schedule may be changed from time to time by Management and will be posted
for thirty (30) days by Management before its effective date. Such schedule
or its revisions are incorporated by reference herein. The bill shall specify
the damages, work done, and the cost. Payment shall not be due until two
weeks after written notice to the tenant of the charges.
d. SECURITY DEPOSIT
1. Amount
Tenant shall pay for a Security Deposit of the lesser of two hundred fifty
dollars ($250.00) or the equivalent of two months gross rent.
2. Payment method
a. Payment of the security deposit as determined in #1 above, is due at
move-in unless the resident provides a stove, or in the case of extreme
hardship.
b. If a resident provides a stove, or in the case of extreme hardship, the
resident shall pay the security deposit in installments as follows:
Upon commencement of tenancy, tenant shall pay fifty dollars ($50.00) of
the security deposit. The balance shall be paid in ten (10) equal installments
(rounded off to the nearest dollar), with the first installment due at the
beginning of the second month of tenancy.
The security deposit shall be used by Management at lease termination to
pay for the cost of repair of damages, (including cleaning of the dwelling
unit, development buildings, facilities, and common areas) caused by the
Tenant, members of the household, or guests. The security deposit shall
also be used by Management to apply to any rent or other charges owed by
the Tenant at lease termination.
Management shall return the security deposit or any balance of the deposit
within fourteen (14) days after the Tenant vacates the dwelling unit.
6. REDETERMINATION OF RENT, DWELLING UNIT SIZE AND ELIGIBILITY
a. Tenant shall report to Management within fourteen (14) days of occurrence,
any change in the household composition (such as changes in the number of
persons in the household). Failure to do so will result in a lease violation
which may cause Management to take steps to terminate the lease.
b. All determinations, referred to in this paragraph shall be made in accordance
with Management's approved Occupancy Policy and Schedule of Rents, available
in the District Housing Management Office.
c. Regular Redeterminations
1) Management shall periodically determine:
a) Whether Tenant's rent should be changed.
b) Whether Tenant's dwelling unit size is still appropriate for Tenant's
family composition.
2) The periodic determination referred to in
section c. 1) above shall occur:
a) Upon occupancy.
b) Once each year.
c) Other times as needed.
3) As requested by Management at the time specified in section c.2 above,
Tenant shall provide accurate, written, current, verifiable information
to Management as to:
a. Composition of household (number of people in Tenant's household, their
sex and any other information required by Management).
b. The source and amount of income received by everyone in Tenant's household.
Current written verification acceptable to Management must be provided within
fifteen (15) days of notification to Tenant.
c. Any unusual expenses or circumstances which create a financial burden
on the household (For example, some medical costs or child care costs may
be considered unusual expenses, when verified in writing).
Failure to do so is a material violation of this lease.
d. Interim Redeterminations
1) The rent shown in paragraph 5, or as adjusted as set forth herein, shall
remain in effect during the period between regular redeterminations unless
Tenant's rent should be adjusted in accordance with the Authority's Occupancy
Policy and Schedule of Rents. The Tenant is responsible for providing written
proof of such change to Management.
2) When Tenant reports a change in household circumstances (such as a decrease
in income) Tenant's rent shall be redetermined and adjusted as indicated
by the Authority's Occupancy Policy Schedule of Rents.
3) In the event Tenant's rent is reduced as set forth herein, Tenant shall
within thirty (30) days of occurrence report any further change in family
circumstances (such as an increase in income) which occur prior to the next
regular redetermination
e. If Management determines that the size of the Tenant's present unit is
no longer appropriate to Tenant's household composition in accordance with
the Authority's Occupancy Policy, the Tenant shall move to a unit of an
appropriate size within thirty (30) days of notification by Management of
the availability of an appropriate size vacant dwelling unit. If the tenant
fails to move as requested by Management, Management has the right to take
appropriate legal action, as determined by Management.
f. When the Tenant does not agree with Management's redetermination of the
amount of rent payable by the Tenant (not including determination of the
Housing Authority's schedule of Utility Allowances) or determines that the
Tenant must transfer to another unit based on family composition, the Tenant
may ask for an explanation of the determination and request a hearing under
the Housing Authority's Grievance Procedures.
7. TENANT'S RIGHT TO USE AND OCCUPY
Tenant's household has the right to exclusive use and occupancy of the dwelling
unit. This right includes having guests stay in the dwelling unit up to
fourteen (14) days, or a longer period only when the prior written consent
of Management has been obtained.
8. MANAGEMENT'S OBLIGATIONS
Management is obligated to:
a. Maintain the dwelling unit, development buildings, facilities, and common
areas in a decent, safe and sanitary condition
b. Comply with the requirements of the applicable building codes, housing
codes, and regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD), materially affecting health and safety.
c. Make necessary repairs to the premises.
d. Keep development buildings, facilities, and common areas, not otherwise
assigned to tenants for maintenance and upkeep in a clean and safe condition.
e. Maintain in good and safe working order and condition electrical, plumbing,
sanitary, heating, ventilating, and other facilities and appliances, including
elevators, supplies or required to be supplied by Management.
f. Provide and maintain trash and garbage receptacles for the deposit of
garbage, rubbish and other waste removed from the dwelling unit by the tenant
in accordance with paragraph 9.h of this lease.
g. Supply running water and reasonable amounts of hot water and reasonable
amounts of heat at appropriate times of the year (according to local custom
and usage) except where heat or hot water is generated by an installation
within the Tenant's exclusive control is supplied by a direct utility connection.
h. Notify tenant of the specific grounds for any proposed adverse action
by Management.
9. OBLIGATIONS OF TENANT, MEMBERS OF HOUSEHOLD, AND GUESTS
Tenant is obligated to comply with the following rules. Tenant is also responsible
for causing members of the household and guests to comply with the following.
a. To pay rent when due (see Paragraph 5, a).
b. Not to assign the lease or to sublease the dwelling unit.
c. Not to provide accommodations for boarders or lodgers.
d. To use the dwelling unit solely as a private dwelling for the Tenant
and the Tenant's household as identified in Paragraph 3, and not to use
the dwelling unit or permit its use for any other purpose.
e. To abide by the House Rules for the benefit and well-being of the housing
development and the tenants as posted in the District Office, and by this
reference incorporated herein.
f. To comply with all obligations imposed upon Tenants by applicable provisions
of building and housing codes materially affecting health and safety, incorporated
herein.
g. To keep the dwelling unit and such other areas as may be assigned to
the tenant for the tenant's exclusive use in a clean and safe condition
(E.G. if required resident must provide an operating stove.)
h. To dispose of all garbage, rubbish, and other waste from the dwelling
unit in a sanitary and safe manner
i. To use only in a reasonable manner all electrical, plumbing, heating,
ventilating, air conditioning, elevators and other facilities and appurtenances
in the development buildings and common areas.
j. To refrain from scattering rubbish, destroying, defacing, damaging, or
removing any part of the dwelling unit or development.
k. To pay reasonable charges (other than for wear and tear) for the repair
of damages to the dwelling unit, development, buildings, facilities, or
common areas caused by either intentional or negligent conduct of Tenant,
members of the household, or guests.
l. To conduct himself/herself and cause other persons who are in the dwelling
unit or in the common area of development with Tenant's consent to conduct
themselves in a manner which will not disturb neighbors (including those
neighbors who are not tenants of low rent public housings) peaceful enjoyment
of their housing and which will be conducive to maintaining the development
in a decent, safe and sanitary condition.
m. To assure that the tenant, any member of the household, a guest, or another
person under the tenant's control, shall not engage in
(i) Any criminal activity that threatens the health, safety, or right to
peaceful enjoyment of the premises by other public housing residents, or
threatens the health and safety of the housing authority employees (e.g.,
violent acts, possession of illegal firearms, electrical/gas meter tampering,
etc.)
(ii) Any drug-related criminal activity on or near the premise (e.g., manufacture,
sale distribution, use, or possession of illegal drugs or drug paraphernalia,
etc.)
n. Not to make any repairs or alterations or install permanently affixed
carpet or any equipment including antennas, or to use a water bed without
the prior written consent of Management.
o. Not to keep or permit to keep any dogs, cats, or other pets in or about
the premises which results in a risk to personal health or safety of any
person or damage to property.
p. Not to create (by act or omission) or permit to exist any condition on
the premises which results in risk to personal health or safety of any person
or damage to property (if required resident must provide for the uninterrupted
provision of electric and gas services.)
q. To immediately report to Central Maintenance any vandalism to the premises
and any need for repair to the interior or exterior of the dwelling unit
and any other area used by the Tenant in connection with the Tenant's occupancy
of the dwelling unit.
r. To participate in a training program on housekeeping and home care skills
if requested to so by the Management. Such training shall be provided by
Management.
10. GROUNDS MAINTENANCE
Tenant shall maintain walkways, stairs, landings, hallways, grounds, patios,
and landscaping adjacent to the dwelling unit. Management must be notified
if the Tenant is unable to maintain the grounds due to the age or physical
condition in the event Tenant neglects to maintain the areas assigned. Tenant
shall pay to Management all expenses necessary for Management to maintain
or repair these areas.
11. Hazardous Defects
Tenant shall take every care to prevent fires, not to keep any gasoline
or gasoline operated device, solvents, or other combustible materials or
substances in any part of or around the apartment, balconies, or enclosed
spaces and to exercise particular caution with respect to children playing
with matches and/or lighters.
In the event the dwelling unit is damaged to the extent that conditions
are created which are hazardous to life, health or safety of the occupants
a. Tenant shall immediately notify the fire department (in case of fire),
Central Maintenance, Security and Management
b. Management shall be responsible for repair of the dwelling unit within
a reasonable time. If the damage is caused by Tenant, members of the household
or guests, Tenant shall pay the reasonable costs of repair.
c. Management shall offer standard alternative housing, if available, where
necessary repairs cannot be made in a reasonable time.
d. In the event repairs are not made within a reasonable time, or alternative
housing is not available, Tenant shall pay a lower rent in proportion to
the seriousness of the damage and loss of value as a dwelling. Tenant shall
not pay a lower rent if s/he refuses the decent, safe and sanitary alternative
housing or if the damage was caused by Tenant, members of the household
or guests.
12. INSPECTIONS AND ACCESS
a. Before move-in, Management and Tenant shall inspect the dwelling unit.
Management shall give Tenant a written statement of conditions of the dwelling
unit and the equipment provided with the unit. The statement shall be verified
and signed by Management and Tenant.
b. When Tenant moves out, Management shall inspect the unit and furnish
tenant with a written statement of damages for which Tenant
is responsible. Such statement is subject to modification upon further inspection
by the Maintenance Department. Tenant may inspect the unit with Management
unless Tenant leaves without giving prior notice.
c. Management may enter tenant's dwelling unit as follows:
1) Management shall provide Tenant with two days written notice stating
the purpose of its entry to the dwelling unit. Management entry shall be
between the hours of 8:00 and 4:30 p.m. for the purposes of performing routine
inspections and maintenance and for making repairs and improvements.
2) Management may enter the premises at any time without advance notification
when there is a reasonable cause to believe that an emergency exists, and
3) If all adult members of the household are absent at the time of entry,
Management shall leave in the dwelling unit a written statement specifying
the date, time and purpose of entry.
13. NOTICE
a. Any notice to Tenant from Management shall be in writing, a) delivered
personally to Tenant or to an adult member of Tenant's household, or b)
sent by prepaid first class mail properly addressed to Tenant. If the Tenant
is visually impaired, any notice to the tenant of an adverse action will
be in an accessible format.
b. Any notice Tenant gives to Management shall be in writing, delivered
either to the District Management Office responsible for the development
in which the dwelling unit is located, or Management's Central Office.
14. TERMINATION OF THE LEASE
a. This lease may be terminated by Tenant at any time by giving thirty (30)
days written notice to Management in the manner specified in Paragraph 13.
Tenant shall leave the dwelling unit in a clean and good condition and return
the keys to Management when Tenant moves out.
b. If, though any cause, a signer of the lease ceases to be a member of
Tenant's household, this lease shall terminate. A new lease may be executed
and signed by the responsible remaining adult member of the household provided
s/he conduct his or herself as required by the terms and provisions of the
lease and the family continues to be eligible for low-rent housing.
c. If Tenant transfers to another apartment operated by Management, this
lease shall terminate and a new lease shall be executed for the dwelling
unit into which Tenant moves.
d. Management may terminate or refuse to renew this lease for the Tenant's
serious or repeated violation of material terms of this lease, such as not
making payments due, not complying with paragraph 9, or other good cause.
e. Management shall give Tenant written notice of termination of the lease,
stating specific grounds for termination, and informing the tenant of the
right to examine documents in the tenant's file directly related to the
termination of tenancy, by:
1) Fourteen (14) days in the case of failure to pay rent;
2) A reasonable time proportionate to the urgency of the situation in the
case of creation or maintenance of a threat to the health or safety of other
tenants or Management's employees. Under this provision, Management considers
any fire caused by the action or failure to act on the part of the Tenant,
household members, or guests as grounds for termination of the lease for
the affected apartment or other apartment to which the Tenant and Tenant's
household have been transferred. Management also considers any criminal
activity that threatens the health, safety or right to peaceful enjoyment
of the development by other residents or any drug-related activity on or
near such premises by Tenant, members of household, or guests as grounds
for termination under this provision.
3) Thirty (30) days in all other cases.
15. ABANDONMENT OF PROPERTY
If Tenant is absent from the dwelling unit for fourteen (14) consecutive
days and rent is owed. Tenant shall, at the option of Management, be considered
to have abandoned the dwelling unit. Management may then proceed to repossess
the unit and dispose of the tenant's personal property pursuant to state
law.
16. WAIVER OF LEASE PROVISIONS
Management does not give up any of its rights to enforce the provisions
of this lease unless it does so in writing. For example, Management does
not give up its right to pursue an eviction action if it collects rent knowing
that Tenant has not fulfilled Tenant's responsibilities under this lease.
17. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
All disputes about the lease or concerning the responsibilities of Tenant's
household or Management shall be resolved in accordance with the Oakland
Housing Authority Grievance Procedure. The Grievance Procedure is posted
in the District and Central Management Offices and is incorporated in this
lease by reference.
18. ATTORNEY FEES AND COURT COSTS
In the event that the Authority or Tenant shall commence any legal action
or proceeding against the other to enforce any convenant, term or condition
of this lease, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an award
of reasonable attorney fees and court costs.
19. PROVISION FOR MODIFICATION
a. Changes to this lease, other than changes in Tenant rent amount, shall
be written addendum signed by both Management and Tenant.
b. The Schedule of Charges for Service and Repairs, Schedule of Rents, Re-examination
Schedule, House Rules, and Grievance Procedure, all incorporated into this
lease by reference, may be changed from time-to-time by Management. Tenant
shall be given thirty (30) days written notice setting forth the proposed
changes,
the reasons for them, and providing Tenant with an opportunity to make written
comments. Tenant's written comments shall be taken into consideration by
Management before the proposed changes become effective. A copy of such
notice shall be
1) Delivered directly or mailed to Tenant; or
2) Posted in the District and Central Management Offices.
By signing below, Tenant and Management enter into this lease which shall
take effect on the "Effective date" shown on the top of page 1
of this lease.
HOUSING AUTHORITY
OF THE CITY OF
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
PEARLIE RUCKER 12-17-96 By (illegible) 12-17-96
TENANT (Date) PHA (Date)
___________________________ Title Housing Manager__
TENANT (Date) PHA (Date)
OHA OAKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY
OCCUPANT'S RESPONSIBILITY
I, the undersigned, am aware that under the terms and conditions of the
Housing Lease I just signed that it is a violation to allow anyone not listed
on my lease to reside in my apartment.
As I am the lessee of this apartment, I am responsible for all damages and
the conduct of all activities in my apartment.
Should I violate the terms and conditions of my lease, I am aware that I
could be subject to legal action.
Lessee PEARLIE RUCKER
PEARLIE RUCKER
Date 4/13/98
WD 230581 408468
RUCKER, PEARLIE
2005 E 21ST . 102
OAKLAND, CA 94606-4270
Witnessed RONALD SMITH
RONALD SMITH
Housing Manager
Date 4/13/98
HE 9007
OKLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY
TENANT AGREEMENT
TO MAINTAIN A DRUG-FREE ENVIRONMENT
The Okland Housing Authority's (OHA) police on drugs and drug-related criminal
activity has been explained to me by my Housing Manager. Additionally, I
have been told about the federal regulation regarding the "One Strike"
policy, which states that I may be evicted from public housing for illegal
use of a controlled substance or abuse of alcohol which interferes with
the health, safety, or right of peaceful enjoyment of the premises by other
residents by myself, any member of my household or guests.
I am aware of Paragrah 9, Section M, of my Lease Agreement which specifically
prohibits the use, sale or possession of any illegal drugs or drug paraphernalia
on OHA property by myself, any member of my household or guests. I am also
aware that any drug-related criminal activity on or off the premises, not
just on or near the premises, by myself or any member of my household is
prohibited. I understand that if I or any member of my household or guests
should violate this lease provision, my tenancy may be terminated and I
may be evicted.
I agree to comply with the OHA's policy regarding drugs and drug-related
criminal activity and to do all I can to prevent the use, sale or possession
of drugs in my unit or the involvement in drug-related criminal activity
by my household or guests. I also agree to inform all my household members
and guests of OHA's policy regarding drugs and drug-related criminal activity.
/s/ PEARLIE RUCKER 4/13/98
Resident Date
RONALD SMITH 4/13/98
Housing Manager Date
HMD 9503 (Rev. 10/96)
2