Phillips Neighborhood Hsg. Tr. v. Brown

4 Citing cases

  1. Rucker v. Davis

    203 F.3d 627 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 13 times
    Holding that a statute requiring the terms of a lease to be reasonable does not override a statute authorizing the eviction of innocent tenants whose guests secretly possess illegal drugs

    To avoid this result is eminently reasonable. See Phillips Neighborhood Hous. Trust v. Brown, 564 N.W.2d 573, 575 (Minn.Ct.App. 1997) ("[T]here is a strong public policy interest in eliminating drugs from subsidized housing. Evicting those who violate the lease by having controlled substances in their apartments is [the landlord's] most effective, if not its only effective, means of eliminating drugs and providing a safe environment.").

  2. Terrace v. Miller

    No. CX-98-2423 (Minn. Ct. App. Jun. 1, 1999)

    On review, we determine only whether the district court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous. Phillips Neighborhood Housing Trust v.Brown, 564 N.W.2d 573, 574 (Minn.App. 1997) , review denied (Sept. 18, 1997).

  3. Perciavalle v. McDonough

    74 F.4th 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2023)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses

    This view was not articulated or adopted in the Allen opinion, and the government's lack of jurisdiction theory is untenable. The Board denied Mr. Perciavalle's claim "as a matter of law," J.A. 71, and the Veterans Court reviewed this denial de novo, following Andrews v. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 177, 182 (2004), aff'd sub nom. Andrews v. Nicholson, 421 F.3d 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2005), and Phillips v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 25, 30 (1997). The government urges that 38 U.S.C. ยง 7261(c), which prohibits the Veterans Court from conducting a de novo review of factual findings, prohibited the Veterans Court from reviewing the CUE claim de novo.

  4. Johnson v. Sorenson

    No. C3-00-448 (Minn. Ct. App. Sep. 19, 2000)

    On review, we determine only whether the district court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous. Phillips Neighborhood Hous. Trust v. Brown, 564 N.W.2d 573, 574 (Minn.App. 1997), review denied (Minn. Sept. 18, 1997).