• NY Apartment Law
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
  • Commercial Lease Law
  • Guidebooks
  • Archives
  • Main Articles
  • Departments
  • eAlerts
  • Blogs
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • NY Apartment Law
  • New York Apartment Law Insider
  • New York Landlord V. Tenant
  • Co-Op & Condo Case Law Digest
  • New York Rent Regulation Checklist, Fourth Edition
  • 2025 New York City Apartment Management Checklist
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
  • Fair Housing Coach
  • Assisted Housing Management Insider
  • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
  • Fair Housing Boot Camp. Basic Training For New Hires
  • Commercial Lease Law
  • Commercial Lease Law Insider
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses: Tenant's Edition
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
  • Main Articles
  • Features
  • Certification
  • Compliance
  • Crime & Security
  • Dealing with Households
  • Income Calculations
  • Maintenance
  • Screening Applicants
  • Departments
  • Dos and Don'ts
  • Q and A
  • Recent Court Rulings
  • HUD Audits
  • In the News
  • Ask the Insider
  • Ask the Insider
  • Send Us A Question
May 20, 2025
We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
The Habitat Group Logo
  • NY Apartment Law
    • New York Apartment Law Insider
    • New York Landlord V. Tenant
    • Co-Op & Condo Case Law Digest
    • New York Rent Regulation Checklist, Fourth Edition
    • 2025 New York City Apartment Management Checklist
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
    • Fair Housing Coach
    • Assisted Housing Management Insider
    • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    • Fair Housing Boot Camp. Basic Training For New Hires
  • Commercial Lease Law
    • Commercial Lease Law Insider
    • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
      • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
    • Best Commercial Lease Clauses: Tenant's Edition
  • Guidebooks
  • May 20, 2025
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • May 20, 2025
AHMI Logo.webp
  • Archives
  • Main Articles
    • Features
    • Certification
    • Compliance
    • Crime & Security
    • Dealing with Households
    • Income Calculations
    • Maintenance
    • Screening Applicants
  • Departments
    • Dos and Don'ts
    • Q and A
    • Recent Court Rulings
    • HUD Audits
    • In the News
    • Ask the Insider
      • Send Us A Question
  • eAlerts
  • Blogs
Free Issue
The Habitat Group Logo
May 19, 2025
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
Home » Class Action Lawsuit for Mold Injuries Can Continue Against PHA

Class Action Lawsuit for Mold Injuries Can Continue Against PHA

May 19, 2015

Facts: Two residents filed for a class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, for damages related to their alleged exposure to mold while living in housing developments operated by the local PHA. Originally, the residents sought to define the potential class as all residents affected by mold who occupied units managed by the PHA on Dec. 1, 1980, through the present. The trial court then decided to make the potential pool of residents joining the lawsuit smaller by restricting the class definition to start in 1998, the year HUD regulation Part 5, Sec. 5.703(f) contractually bound the PHA to keep the units and common areas free of mold.

The PHA asked the court to reverse the class certification based on this reliance on federal regulation. The PHA argued that because the HUD regulation doesn’t provide a private cause of action it couldn’t be used to define who may be allowed to join the class action lawsuit. Therefore, the pool of residents joining the lawsuit couldn’t be certified.

Ruling: A Louisiana appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision to grant the residents’ request for class certification.

Reasoning: An order certifying the residents’ class action suit against the PHA was proper under state law because the potential class of plaintiffs involved nearly 3,000 leaseholders and residents who had been exposed to mold. The claims of the class members had a sufficient common character and were derived from a common source. The residents assert that the evidence presented to the trial court, including testimony and the PHA’s own maintenance records, demonstrates that the PHA was fully aware of the mold infestation, but failed to properly remediate the problem as required by the lease agreements with HUD.

In addition, although the court recognized that that 24 CFR §5.703(f) doesn’t confer a private right of action upon the residents, the court found that as a public safety regulation, it may be utilized in determining whether the PHA violated its duties and obligations under state law.

  • Jones v. Housing Authority of New Orleans, April 2015
Recent Court Rulings
    • Related Articles

      Residents Can File Class Action Lawsuit Against PHA

      Bedbug-Affected Residents Can File Class Action Lawsuit

      Discrimination Case Against PHA Allowed to Continue

    • Publications
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Co-op & Condo Case Law Tracker Digest
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • New York Landlord v. Tenant
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    • Additional Links
      • Contact Us
      • Advertise
      • Group Subscriptions
      • Privacy Policy
    • Boards of Advisors
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    ©2025. All Rights Reserved. Content: The Habitat Group. CMS, Hosting & Web Development: ePublishing