Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Cienega Gardens v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided April 25, 2000No. 94-1 CPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION and ORDER

HODGES, Judge.

Plaintiffs are owners of low-income housing projects in Southern California. They were encouraged to enter the market by legislation that allowed the Federal Housing Administration to provide mortgage insurance to private developers. They also received certain financial incentives. Prior to 1968, owners received below market mortgage interest rates. After that, they received market-rate mortgages with an interest subsidy. In either case, owners were expected to pass these financial benefits to their tenants through lower rents.

A rider to their deeds of trust…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning AgencySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  3. Greenbrier v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
  4. Howard W. Heck, and Associates, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  5. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1995

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Anaheim Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
  2. Resource Investments, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  3. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
  4. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
  5. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API