Tenant-Side Subsidized Housing Eviction Defense: Federal Notice Dismissals and Keeping the Subsidy Alive

Zak Fisher
Zak Fisher | The Law Office of Zak Fisher

Zak Fisher is the founder of The Law Office of Zak Fisher, a tenant-side law firm based in West Hollywood, California. His practice focuses on representing tenants in eviction defense and unlawful detainer litigation throughout Los Angeles County. The firm exclusively represents tenants and does not represent landlords in eviction proceedings.

Live Video-Broadcast: December 3, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The notice rule that controls your client’s eviction may have changed the week before it was served

Tenant attorneys defending evictions in federally subsidized housing face a moving set of notice rules. The CARES Act’s 30-day notice (15 U.S.C. § 9058(c)) remains on the books for every “covered dwelling,” but courts are split on whether it survived the moratorium and whether it reaches anything beyond nonpayment. HUD’s 2024 rule requiring 30-day nonpayment notices in public housing and project-based rental assistance remains in effect, but only because HUD’s February 2026 revocation was indefinitely delayed after litigation; a final rule could issue at any time. The U.S. Department of Agriculture rescinded its own 30-day rule in February 2026 and now defers to state law. Layered on top are the program regulations, the HAP contract and tenancy addendum, and state and local notice and just-cause law.

This program trains lawyers who already defend eviction cases to prove a property’s federal coverage from public records, identify which notice layer controlled on the day the notice was served, plead the defect in their state’s procedural vehicle, and protect a client’s voucher when the public housing agency moves to terminate assistance alongside the eviction. California unlawful detainer practice is the worked example. Working from redacted real-world records, attendees practice making fast calls on coverage, pleading, hearing requests, sequencing, and settlement wording. They leave with a coverage checklist, a notice-rule matrix by program with a status-as-of column, an annotated demurrer (the California motion to dismiss) and answer, a dual-track timeline worksheet, and subsidy-safe settlement clauses.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • Proving Federal Coverage
    How to establish CARES Act and program coverage from the recorded deed of trust, HUD multifamily and National Housing Preservation Database records, tax-credit allocation records, PHA records, and the HAP contract, and get it onto the record through requests for admission, judicial notice, and the owner’s own verified complaint.
  • Notice-Rule Matrix
    Which layer controlled on the service date: CARES Act § 9058(c), HUD’s 2024 rule (24 CFR 966.4 and 247.4) and its delayed revocation, USDA’s February 25, 2026 rescission for Section 514 and 515 properties, the voucher tenancy addendum and 24 CFR 982.310, and state and local law.
  • CARES Act Survival Split
    How to argue the 30-day notice in 2026 across Arvada Village Gardens, Hazelwood, MIMG CLXXII Retreat on 6th, Barrera v. Sedona Pointe, and Knight, including “30 days to vacate” versus “30 days to cure” and the hybrid pay-or-quit notice.
  • Pleading Voucher Defects
    How to plead overstated-notice, no-grounds, no-PHA-copy, and PHA-nonpayment defects under Code Civ. Proc. § 1161(2) and 24 CFR 982.310 by demurrer, motion to quash, and answer, and how tender, waiver by acceptance of rent, and mid-case re-service change the strict-compliance analysis under SVF Grosvenor Del Rey and Colonial Manor.
  • Dual-Track Hearing Strategy
    What counsel must do in the first week to preserve the informal hearing under 24 CFR 982.555, how the 982.552(b)(2) mandatory trigger and the administrative plan shape the record, and when to sequence the hearing ahead of the unlawful detainer trial using VAWA, mitigation, and reasonable-accommodation evidence.
  • Subsidy-Safe Resolution
    How to weigh dismissal against a continuance that keeps the subsidy intact, handle HAP payments and abated-HAP owner claims under 982.311(b) and 982.404, spot an insufficient-funding termination under 982.454 and Notice PIH 2025-28, and draft stipulated-dismissal terms that create no new ground for termination.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: December 3, 2026

  • 2:30 pm – 4:40 pm Eastern
  • 1:30 pm – 3:40 pm Central
  • 12:30 pm – 2:40 pm Mountain
  • 11:30 am – 1:40 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Zak Fisher, Attorney and Founder | The Law Office of Zak Fisher

Zak Fisher is the founder of The Law Office of Zak Fisher, a tenant-side law firm based in West Hollywood, California. His practice focuses on representing tenants in eviction defense and unlawful detainer litigation throughout Los Angeles County. The firm exclusively represents tenants and does not represent landlords in eviction proceedings.

Mr. Fisher’s work encompasses California unlawful detainer law, Section 8 voucher eviction defense, tenant protections, rent stabilization, and source-ofincome discrimination claims. He represents tenants facing eviction, including individuals whose housing subsidies and voucher eligibility may be affected by the outcome of their cases. His practice also addresses related matters involving habitability, security deposits, and public housing agency voucher terminations. In addition to his housing practice, he maintains a criminal defense practice representing individuals facing misdemeanor and felony charges in California courts.

  • Education & Credentials

Mr. Fisher earned his Juris Doctor from UCLA School of Law in 2020 and his Bachelor of Arts from Middlebury College in 2016. He is admitted to practice law in California and has been a member of the State Bar of California since October 2020.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Fisher has been named to The National Trial Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 in California and serves on the organization’s Executive Committee. In 2021, he authored the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s Tenant’s Attorney Training Materials, a curriculum used to train attorneys undertaking tenant-side eviction defense. This work reflects his involvement in developing educational resources for attorneys representing tenants in unlawful detainer proceedings.

  • Professional Involvement

Mr. Fisher has been a member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association since 2021 and is also a member of a Los Angeles Inn of Court. His professional involvement complements his work in tenant advocacy, eviction defense, and California housing law. Through his authorship of the LACBA Tenant’s Attorney Training Materials, he has also contributed to attorney education in the area of tenant representation.

  • Experience

Before founding his firm in 2021, Mr. Fisher served as an Eviction Defense Fellow at Neighborhood Legal Services from 2020 to 2021, where he represented low-income tenants in unlawful detainer proceedings. Since establishing his practice, he has handled a range of tenant-side matters, including illegal evictions, habitability disputes, security deposit claims, Section 8 and housing voucher tenancy terminations, and cases involving local just-cause eviction protections and rent stabilization ordinances.

His Section 8 practice includes defending voucher holders facing eviction and addressing issues involving eviction notices, waiver arguments, and the potential loss of housing subsidies. His work also encompasses matters involving Long Beach voucher terminations and the City of Los Angeles right-tocounsel program. His legal practice draws on California’s tenant-protection framework, including Code of Civil Procedure §§ 1161 and 1167, AB 1482, the Los Angeles Rent Stabilization Ordinance, and the Ellis Act. He also handles source-of-income discrimination claims and disputes involving public housing agency voucher terminations.

In addition to housing litigation, Mr. Fisher maintains a criminal defense practice involving misdemeanor and felony cases, diversion, and expungement matters in California courts. His combined experience in housing and criminal defense allows him to address cases in which housing instability and criminal legal issues may intersect.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Proving Federal Coverage and Pleading the Notice Defect | Zak Fisher | 2:30pm – 3:30pm

The first hour covers how to prove federal coverage when the owner won’t say, which notice layer controls across the CARES Act, HUD’s 2024 rule and its pending revocation, USDA’s 2026 rescission, the voucher tenancy addendum, and state law, and how to plead the defect in the state’s framing. In California that means demurrer or motion to quash, preserving the defense in the answer, and proving it at trial. The session is taught by a tenant-side housing attorney who has litigated Section 8 voucher evictions through trial, including the overstated-notice and waiver theories that decide most of them, and who has weighed a dismissal against a resolution that keeps the subsidy intact.

BREAK | 3:30pm – 3:40pm

SESSION 2 – Keeping the Subsidy When the Eviction and the PHA Termination Run Together | Zak Fisher | 3:40pm – 4:40pm

A one-hour, tenant-side session for subsidized-housing defense counsel on keeping a voucher alive when the eviction and the PHA termination run together. The hour covers the mandatory termination trigger in 24 CFR 982.552(b)(2) and how administrative plans rewrite it, hearing rights and timing under 982.555, HAP payments during the eviction, insufficient-funding terminations under 982.454 and Notice PIH 202528, and settlement wording that keeps the family off the mandatory-termination track. The hour is taught from the eviction defense side: what unlawful detainer counsel must do in the first week to protect the hearing right, how the court case and the hearing feed each other, when to push the hearing ahead of the trial, and the settlement language that keeps a family off the mandatory-termination track. The informalhearing segment is built on the regulations and administrative-plan provisions attendees will actually have to read, and would pair well with a co-presenter who regularly appears at PHA hearings.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
AI-Augmented Legal Workflows: A Map to Success
AI-Augmented Legal Workflows: A Map to Success Thu, November 19, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
Using Adobe Acrobat’s AI Assistant for Legal
Using Adobe Acrobat’s AI Assistant for Legal Fri, November 20, 2026
Live Webcast