|Case Date:||May 13, 1980|
Mississippi Attorney General Opinions 1980. AGO 000001583. May 13, 1980DOCN 000001583 DOCK 1980-1471 AUTH P. L. DOUGLAS DATE 19800513 RQNM HONORABLE FRANCIS T. ZACHARY SUBJ WATER DISTRICTS SBCD 266 TEXT Honorable Francis T. Zachary Legal Counsel for Pat Harrison Waterway District Post Office Box 24 Hattiesburg, Mississippi 39401 Dear Mr. Zachary: Attorney General Allain has received your letter of request dated April 10, 1980, and has assigned it to me for research and reply. You submit the following, to-wit: "This letter is sent to you for the purpose of clarification and review of a previous opinion as rendered by your office on September 11, 1978, by John M. Weston, Special Assistant Attorney General, in regard to relocation assistance of the Huddleston property on the Chunky #22 Project of the Pat Harrison Waterway District and the Soil Conservation Service. "I enclose for your review and consideration copies of the letter of September 11th of Mr. Weston and a letter dated February 7, 1980, of the Soil Conservation Service in regard to this matter and a further letter of April 4, 1980, of the Soil Conservation Service setting out the position of the General Counsel for the Soil Conservation Service in Atlanta, Georgia. "Your opinion of September 11th states that Mr. Leon Huddleston would not be entitled to any relocation as- sistance under Section 43-39-1 et seq. of the Mississip- pi Code Annotated (1972). However, upon reading of that statute section I cannot find where this right would be purely personal as to Mr. Huddleston's mother and thus denying Mr. Huddleston any and all rights of relocation assistance under the act. "It has been the contention of the Soil Conservation Service that all relocation assistance would be under and through public law 91-646 known as the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition's Policy Act of 1970 more spe- cifically set out in 42 U.S.C. Section 4601 et seq. and after thoroughly reading said U.S.C. statutes and sections, Leon Huddleston, in my opinion, would qualify as a displaced person. As you see from the previous opinion of your office of Septem- ber 11, 1978, there appears to be divergent opinions between your office and the office of General Counsel for the Soil Conservation Service as to Mr. Huddleston's rights for reloca- tion assistance. I might...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP