Summer 2003

Pine Tree Case Summaries

The following are summaries of some of the cases Pine Tree Native American Unit attorneys have handled over the last six months.  You can call attorneys Judith Plano or Mike Guare or paralegal Danny Mills at 1-800-879-7463.

Housing:

The client rented a trailer in a trailer park.  There were problems from the beginning. For the first few weeks the water pressure was so low that the client's family had to drive to a relative's house an hour away to bathe.  There was no hot water in the kitchen.  There was mold throughout the trailer.  Because there was no heat in the bedrooms the whole family slept in the living room.  The Client called code enforcement a week after he moved in.  Because repairs were never made to the trailer, the client stopped paying rent.  In May, code enforcement inspected the entire park.  Before the inspection, the landlord sent a notice asking residents not to let the inspectors into their trailers.  The client did let the inspector in.  The landlord then sued to evict the client for non-payment of rent.

The client contacted Judith Plano and went to a court hearing on the eviction.  Judith introduced pictures of the trailer and the client testified to all the problems.  Pine Tree also presented evidence of retaliation for notifying the code enforcement officer.  The judge ruled in favor of the client on this ground.  The client was not evicted.

Another client rented an apartment.  Because of problems with the apartment, the client never moved in.  The landlord refused to return the security deposit.  The client lived in homeless shelters because she did not have the funds for a security deposit.  The client contacted Pine Tree.  After many letters from the client to the property manager and letters and phone calls from Pine Tree to the property manager, the security deposit was returned and the client was able to rent another apartment.

In a third case, the client was being evicted from public housing as his teenaged son was no longer living with him.  In an informal hearing at the housing offices, Judith made the argument that the client was the "remaining member of a tenant family" and as such was considered a "family" by HUD regulations.  Judith explained that the housing authority could not evict him, but had to offer him a smaller unit instead.  The administrator argued that there were no smaller units and that the client was not a family.  Judith referred the administrator to the HUD regulations.

Judith and the client received a letter the next week saying that the client would have to move, but that, because there were no smaller units, the client could have a Section 8 voucher for a one-bedroom unit.  The client was very pleased, as a Section 8 voucher gives him more options than public housing.  He can take his voucher anywhere and has many more choices for housing

Social Security:

The clients received a written notice from the Social Security Administration that monthly benefits for their child were being terminated because the child had turned 18.  However, the child was still a full-time high school student and therefore eligible for benefits.  Pine Tree helped the client in sending the necessary documents to Social Security. Social Security then promptly restored the child's benefits on a retroactive basis.