“Here, plaintiffs and the dissent place undue emphasis on the trappings of contract language such as “guarantee” or “will pay,” construing them as legal promises rather than mere assurances;…

“Accordingly, we find that the trial court correctly found that the Advantage rent subsidy program for the homeless was simply a social service program, and that the defendants did not intend to be bound contractually.

Supreme Court ruling, March 20 2012- court decision with Moskowitz J. dissenting: Zheng 3-20-12 First Department affirmance

ah yes, remember, the government is not your friend and cannot be trusted.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s