As you may or may not be aware there is a lawsuit filed in Georgia challenging the CDC Eviction Moratorium Order (Brown v. Azar 1:20-cv-3702-JPB).  In the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ response to the Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, the CDC/Secretary of Health and Human Services, gave us some further insight into the intent and limitations of the CDC Order.

First, the CDC Eviction Moratorium Order does not stop the Landlord from starting an eviction proceeding.  This means we can file and obtain a monetary judgment from the court.  A landlord cannot, according to the CDC, have the writ of restitution issue thereby physically removing a tenant if the tenant has submitted the CDC Declaration to the landlord.  Second, the Landlord is entitled to challenge the Declaration if the Landlord believes the tenant has submitted false information and/or has perjured himself/herself.

This information changes how the courts have been handling things in Arizona.   First, we can proceed with obtaining judgment on eviction actions for nonpayment of rent.  This gives the owner a monetary judgment on which we can try to collect and will eliminate any potential flood of eviction filings in January of 2021 when the CDC Moratorium expires.  If a tenant is currently employed, we can go forward and garnish wages.  Second, if the owner/landlord is aware that some statement on the CDC attestation form/declaration made by the tenant is false, we can challenge the declaration form.  If it is found to be false, we can proceed with obtaining the writ of restitution and removing the tenant.

DOJ Response to CDC lawsuit

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.