Ginocchio

Woods, Housing Expediter v. Ginocchio

Good Law
180 F.2d 484·1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2445
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 17, 195012234California2,338 words

Opinion

Opinion

Denman, J.

The Expediter appeals from a judgment refusing him an injunction restraining appellee landlord from charging in excess of the maximum rent fixed upon the landlord’s housing accommodation in Reno, Nevada, by the Rent Director for that area. The judgment denied further equitable relief, refusing to order the landlord to pay to her tenant the sum of $1100.00 alleged excess rentals charged her tenant.

The court, in denying the equitable relief, held that the premises were not within the Expediter’s jurisdiction for the fixing of this maximum rent because they were additional housing accommodations created by conversion after February 1, 1947, and hence were not controlled housing accommodations within the Housing and Rent Act of 1947, hereinafter called the Act. Section 202 of that act provides:

The grounds of the Expediter’s appeal are (A) the landlord failed to exhaust the administrative remedy prescribed by the Expediter’s regulations and hence could not raise the question of the latter’s control of the premises, and (B) the court erroneously decided that the premises were not under the Expediter’s jurisdiction.

A. The landlord, having the option either to seek an administrative…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.