Sullivan v. Fall River Housing Authority

• Decision Date: 02 April 1965
• Citation: 348 Mass. 738,205 N.E.2d 701
• Parties: Edward F. SULLIVAN v. FALL RIVER HOUSING AUTHORITY et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 701

205 N.E.2d 701

348 Mass. 738

Edward F. SULLIVAN v.FALL RIVER HOUSING AUTHORITY et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Bristol.

Argued Feb. 3, 1965.

Decided April 2, 1965.

Thomas F. McGuire, Fall River (James E. Holland, Jr., Fall River, with him), for the plaintiff.

David Berman, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the intervener, State Housing Bd.

Henry Z. Horn, Fall River, for the defendant, Fall River Housing Authority.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, CUTTER, SPIEGEL and REARDON, JJ.

WILKINS, Chief Justice.

The plaintiff, a tenant of the Fall River Housing Authority, by this bill in equity sought to prevent a proposed rent increase to become effective July 1, 1963, on the ground that it was arbitrary, unjustified, and in violation of the Housing Authority Law.G.L. c. 121, § 26I(as amended through St. 1955, c. 654, § 2).The State Housing Board, created in accordance with G.L. c. 6, § 64, was allowed to intervene as a partydefendant on September 30, 1963.¹The case was referred to a master, who filed a report, which was confirmed.From a final decree dismissing the billthe plaintiff appealed.

No discussion of the merits is required, as the plaintiff clearly has no standing to maintain this bill.The rentals which a housing authority may charge are governed by G.L. c. 121, § 26FF(as amended through St. 1959, c. 512).Section 26U of G.L. c. 121(as amended through St. 1955, c. 327) relates to the control of housing authorities by the State Housing Board.It requires an authority to keep accounts in a form prescribed by the board, which has powers of investigation and of making rules and regulations 'prescribing standards and stating principles governing the planning, construction, maintenance and operation of projects by housing authorities.'The final sentence of § 26U is, 'Compliance with the Housing Authority Law, the rules and regulations adopted by the housing board hereunder, and the terms of a clearance or low-rent housing project approved by the housing board, may be enforced by a proceeding in equity.'

The sentence just quoted manifestly states a procedure open only to the housing board, and now to the Department of Commerce and Development.There is no indication of a legislative intent at any time to confer a right upon tenants of a housing authority to bring a suit like the present.For earlier legislation see St. 1933, c. 364, § 6(§ 26B); St. 1938, c. 484, § 1(§§ 26AAand26EE); St. 1946, c. 574, § 1(§§ 26Uand26FF).

Had the State Housing Board refused, or should the Department of Commerce and Development now refuse, to enforce the provisions of § 26FF against the defendant, the plaintiff's remedy would have been, and still would be, a petition for a writ of mandamus against the board or department.Brewster v....