Recent Court Rulings

RSS

Facts: A public housing resident sued the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), claiming that the agency inadequately maintained garbage facilities at her building and created hazardous conditions for residents at the garbage collection site. The resident, who claims she is disabled, also alleged that NYCHA failed to accommodate her disability by keeping the elevator in her building in working order. The resident said that she is unable to walk without assista...

Facts: A New York resident used a Housing Choice Voucher provided by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) to subsidize his rent for a unit in a privately owned apartment building in the Bronx. The resident, who claims he is disabled and unable to walk up or down steps, went to court alleging discrimination against him as a disabled individual. He told the court the building's owner failed to provide him access from his apartment on the fourth floor to ...

Facts: An applicant for public housing in Omaha claimed that she had been unfairly denied participation in the program. The Omaha Housing Authority notified the applicant that she was ineligible for benefits based on the results of a criminal background check performed by the agency. The applicant was unaware of the charges against her at the time of her application, and she has subsequently not plead guilty to or been convicted of the two felony forgery charges ...

Facts: A site manager in North Carolina complained to police about possible drug activity in a unit. When police arrived, the resident consented to a search. After the police claimed to find drug paraphernalia and traces of drugs in the unit and wrote a citation against the resident, the site manager sought to evict her. The resident, who rented under a Section 8 subsidy, challenged her eviction in court, claiming that the site had not given her a proper notice o...

Facts: Two rental apartment companies sued the Borough of Magnolia, N.J., to stop the Borough from enforcing its property rental ordinances in a manner that infringed on their rights under the Fair Housing Act.

In 2007, the Borough enacted Ordinance 11A, entitled “An Ordinance Creating Landlord Responsibilities,” which included among its provisions:

Facts: Intending to sell its property, a Washington, D.C., owner stopped participating in the project-based Section 8 program after its HAP contract with HUD expired in 2004. Residents of the site received enhanced vouchers to remain in their units, but when they began offering these vouchers for units at the owner's site, the owner refused to accept them.

Facts: Seventeen Hasidic Jews who had applied for or lived in public housing operated by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) challenged NYCHA's Tenant Selection and Assignment Plan (TSAP) as discriminatory in its treatment of Hasidic applicants at three public housing developments in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn.

Facts: Five fair housing organizations sued the builders and owners of 82 multifamily apartment complexes, alleging that the builders constructed the complexes in a manner that denied access to disabled persons, in violation of the Fair Housing Amendments Act. The builders and owners designed and built the apartment complexes, with over 22,000 units, in 10 states between 1991 and 2007.

Facts: A New York City resident who occupied two single room occupancy (SRO) units with her minor children challenged a local ordinance prohibiting children under 16 from occupying SROs, arguing that the restriction violates the Fair Housing Act. She sued the City of New York on the ground that the restriction constitutes discrimination on the basis of familial status.

Decision: The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled for ...

Facts: The Maine State Housing Authority (MSHA) discovered that one of its residents had been convicted of child molestation in Washington State in 1996, but was not registered as a sex offender, as the law requires. The resident had been receiving rental assistance through a voucher he obtained initially in Massachusetts. MSHA notified the resident that it was ending his voucher benefits on the ground of program fraud and for other reasons.