Sumpter v. White Plains Housing Authority

• Decision Date: 07 July 1970
• Citation: 63 Misc.2d 654,313 N.Y.S.2d 133
• Parties: Application of Willie SUMPTER, Petitioner, For a Judgment under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules to review and nullify a determination of respondent which declared petitioner ineligible for admission as a tenant at respondent's public housing facility v. WHITE PLAINS HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 133

313 N.Y.S.2d 133

63 Misc.2d 654

Application of Willie SUMPTER, Petitioner, For a Judgment

under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules to

review and nullify a determination of respondent which

declared petitioner ineligible for admission as a tenant at respondent's public housing facility v. WHITE PLAINS HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Westchester County.

July 7, 1970.

Andrew L. Levy, White Plains, and David Freeman, Hartsdale, for petitioner.

Alonzo J. Drummond, White Plains, for White Plains Housing Authority.

JOHN W. SWEENY, Justice.

This is an article 78 proceeding brought by petitioner Willie Sumpter to review and annul the determination of the respondent White Plains Housing Authority that petitioner is ineligible for admission as a tenant in respondent's public housing project.

In September of 1968 petitioner made an application for admission to respondent's housing facility. In June of 1969, petitioner was given a personal interview with the Executive Director, at which time petitioner was informed that his application was being rejected because of his criminal record and trouble with the police which therefore prevented him from meeting the standards of desirability as a tenant. Petitioner was further informed that his application would be reviewed at the end of the summer by the Board of the housing authority. By letter dated September 26, 1969 respondent notified petitioner that his application had been reviewed and rejected upon a determination that he was not eligible for admission as a tenant.

Petitioner contends that the rejection of his application was arbitrary and unlawful in that respondent's criminal record does not constitute a course of conduct sufficient to disqualify him as an eligible tenant under the standards of desirability since the charges were minor and remote in time. Petitioner also argues that he was denied procedural due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the failure of the respondent to afford him an evidentiary hearing before his application was denied.

It appears respondent's determination that petitioner was ineligible for admission was based primarily upon petitioner's police record in the City of White Plains, New York. The record consists of several traffic violations, the last one being in 1966, and disorderly conduct charges, the last one being in 1963, for which small fines were imposed. Whether this record, old as it is, is a sufficient basis for...