This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ps represent a class of tenants in public housing projects in Washington state. These tenants ordinarily may be evicted only after a grievance hearing before the public housing authority (PHA). In cases of eviction for drug-related or certain other criminal activity, PHAs may omit the mandatory grievance procedures, but only if D has determined that state court eviction procedures satisfy the elements of due process as defined in 24 C.F.R. § 966.53(c). D determined that Washington's state court eviction procedures satisfy the elements of due process, and PHAs, therefore, could dispense with grievance hearings for crime-related evictions. On March 24, 1992, the Seattle Housing Authority served Marla Davison with an eviction notice stating that she would not be afforded a grievance hearing because her eviction was due to alleged criminal activity. Ps brought this action, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief on the ground that D violated 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(k), the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 551 and D's own regulations, 24 C.F.R. § 10.1, when it issued its due process determination without first providing notice and opportunity to comment. The district court granted summary judgment for D, and this appeal followed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.