Delgado v. New York City Housing Authority
| Citation | 2009 NY Slip Op 7763,66 A.D.3d 607,888 N.Y.S.2d 19 |
| Decision Date | 29 October 2009 |
| Docket Number | 303139/08.,1334. |
| Parties | JULISSA DELGADO et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Petitioners, residents of public housing apartments owned and operated by respondent New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) and a labor union representing apartment painters and painting supervisors employed by NYCHA, seek a judgment (1) enjoining NYCHA from carrying out a plan restructuring its procedures for painting tenant apartments that eliminates most of its paint supervisor positions, reassigns paint supervisors to painter positions, and shifts responsibility for the supervision of contracted paint jobs from painting supervisors to housing development managers responsible for oversight of other contractors, and (2) granting declaratory relief and compelling NYCHA's compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code requirements that it repaint tenants' apartments every three years—which NYCHA concedes it has failed to do—and repaint or recover surfaces in the public areas of housing projects when required to keep them sanitary (Administrative Code § 27-2013 [a] [2]; [b] [2]). Only the Commissioner of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development is authorized to seek such relief or other sanctions and remedies for violations of the Housing Maintenance Code (NY City Charter § 1802 [1]; Administrative Code §§ 27-2120, 27-2121, 27-2122). Therefore, petitioners do not have a private right of action for the injunctive and declaratory relief sought. Nor may petitioners enforce the Housing Maintenance Code through 42 USC § 1983. Compliance with a housing code is not an unambiguously confirmed right secured by the force of federal law (see generally Gonzaga Univ. v Doe, 536 US 273, 283, 290 [2002]) or the United States Constitution (see Lindsey v Normet, 405 US 56, 74 [1972]), and United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 USC) § 1437d (1) (3), which obligates public housing authorities to maintain projects "in a decent, safe, and sanitary condition," "does not create a right enforceable under § 1983 to proper maintenance of the housing project" (Concerned Tenants Assn. of Father Panik Vil. v Pierce, 685 F Supp 316, 322 [D Conn 1988]; see also Thompson v Binghamton Hous. Auth., 546 F Supp 1158, 1183 [ND NY 1982]).
There is also no merit to petitioners' claim that NYCHA...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jurist v. Long Island Power Auth.
...N.Y. v. De Blasio, 171 A.D.3d 636, 101 N.Y.S.3d 280 (2019) (section 50-a of the New York Civil Rights Law ); Delgado v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth., 66 A.D.3d 607, 888 N.Y.S.2d 19 (2009) (Administrative Code of the City of New York); Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n of the City of N.Y., Inc. v. De Blasi......
-
Davis v. City of N.Y.
...obligations”). 161.Domino's Pizza, Inc. v. McDonald, 546 U.S. 470, 476, 126 S.Ct. 1246, 163 L.Ed.2d 1069 (2006). 162. City Mem. at 16; NYCHA Mem. at 20–21. 163.Id. at 17. 164. Pl. Mem. at 28. 165.Hawkins v. 1115 Legal Serv. Care, 163 F.3d 684, 693 (2d Cir.1998) (quoting H.R.Rep. No. 102–40,......
-
Smith v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.
...2006 WL 2546536, at *9. See Rhodes v. Herz, 84 A.D.3d 1, 8, 920 N.Y.S.2d 11 (1st Dep't 2011) ; Delgado v. New York City Hous. Auth., 66 A.D.3d 607, 608, 888 N.Y.S.2d 19 (1st Dep't 2009). She seeks employment based on defendant's very receipt of federal funds, which if reduced or limited wou......
-
Allison v. N.Y.C. Landmarks Pres. Comm'n
...276–77, 519 N.Y.S.2d 804, 514 N.E.2d 116;Rhodes v. Herz, 84 A.D.3d at 10, 13, 920 N.Y.S.2d 11.See Delgado v. New York City Hous. Auth., 66 A.D.3d 607, 608, 888 N.Y.S.2d 19 (1st Dep't 2009). None of respondents contends that the first two criteria are not satisfied here. Petitioners, on the ......