Application to stay Montana Supreme Court's judgment reversing
trial court's judgment that applicant tenant was entitled to
certain rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment
before being evicted from respondent landlord's federally
subsidized low income housing project, is denied in view of lease
provision that either party to lease may terminate it by giving 30
days' written notice to other party, thus making it unnecessary to
reach any due process issue.
MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, Circuit Justice.
Applicant requests that I stay the judgment of the Supreme Court
of Montana in this proceeding contesting her eviction. As matters
currently stand, that court has denied a stay and applicant will be
evicted on February 29.
Applicant lives in federally subsidized low income housing which
was built and is operated by respondent. On September 26, 1974,
respondent sent to applicant a notice to quit, pursuant to the
lease which provided that "[e]ither party may terminate this lease
. . . by giving 30 days written notice in advance to the other
party."
Applicant sued in the Montana state trial court claiming that
respondent's project was so intertwined with the Federal Government
that its action in evicting her was subject to the limitations of
the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. She further
contended that these limitations entitled her to a statement of
reasons amounting to a showing of "good cause," and to a hearing
before she could be evicted.
The state trial court agreed. The Supreme Court of Montana
reversed, holding that the project was sufficiently
Page 424 U. S. 1314
independent of the Federal Government as to make it subject only
to those laws regulating private landlords. The Supreme Court
described the above-quoted lease provision, but did not rely upon
it in its decision.
In view of the express provision of the lease, it seems to me
that this Court, if it were to hear and decide the case, would find
it unnecessary to reach the question of whether respohdents
activities are subject to the Due Process Clause of the Fifth
Amendment. I conclude, therefore, that four Justices of this Court
would not vote to grant certiorari in this case. Accordingly, I
deny the stay.