CANTON - A longtime Stark Metropolitan Housing Authority employee fired early this year has filed a federal lawsuit against the agency and its executive . Civil Rights: Accommodations (1984) 36 Cal.3d 799, 205 Cal.Rptr. When seconds count Unpacking EMS response in Chatham County. First, Authority argues that there is no statutory duty to protect occupants of its properties from criminal acts of third persons. 1401, 1414, 51 L.Ed.2d 711. 332) (5) train officers adequately; or (6) rid the housing project of drug dealers (Brownell v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. Learn more about what you can expect if a Fair Housing Act complaint is filed with HUD. [Citation. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. The Supreme Court found the district was immune from this claim pursuant to section 845. On March 13, 2023, the Justice Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau filed a Statement of Interest in Connolly v. Lanham (D. You must file your complaint within one year of the last date of the alleged discrimination under the Fair Housing Act. A: No. We cant possibly have any effective or equitable approach to meeting the statewide housing crisis if some cities are subject to housing laws and other cities are allowed to opt-out. A man who barely escaped a burning public housing complex died several days later in the hospital. Unlike Caldwell v. Montoya, supra, 10 Cal.4th 972, 42 Cal.Rptr.2d 842, 897 P.2d 1320, the complaint here does not describe what decision-making process, if any, was involved in the failure to warn or the rejection of the transfer application. Here, based upon the facts alleged, we conclude that the complaint sufficiently alleges facts from which a special relationship may be found to exist. The email address cannot be subscribed. A Southern California native, he studied at UC Santa Barbara and UC Irvine. Miniex alleges the Housing Authority retaliated . Housing | Payment of a civil penalty to vindicate the public interest. 239.). A special relationship will be found where (1) there is a voluntary assumption by the public official of a duty toward the injured party; (2) where the public entity or official induce, the victim's reliance on a promise, express or implied, that it would protect him, or (3) where the victim was dependent upon the public entity or official for protection because the official either created the peril or increased or changed the risk which would have otherwise existed by lulling the victim into a false sense of security and perhaps preventing other assistance from being sought. The Authority claims that the filing of this claim precludes appellants from asserting any damages for acts or omissions which occurred prior to the fire, specifically those alleged in the seventh cause of action (for breach of quiet enjoyment) and the eighth cause of action (for nuisance). [Citation; Gov.Code, 835. There is no dispute about the Authority's ownership or control of the Jordan Downs property. Another allegedly assaulted Gonzalezs male friend, by forcefully striking him in the face. (Id. At the time Defendant was in fear for his safety and for the safety of his girlfriend and other friends. 487, in which a woman sued the landlord for negligence and deceit when she was raped in her apartment building. 1477.) If a city is getting good legal advice, they presumably have been informed how strong the case law is on the other side of this question. (C.D. 240, 447 P.2d 352.) This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area. Log in to your WTOP account for notifications and alerts customized for you. ), Residents and Families United to Save our Adult Homes v. Howard Zucker (N. They allege that respondents the City and the Authority failed to warn the residents, failed to transfer residents, failed to expel criminal tenants, failed to place security barriers, and failed to otherwise take appropriate security measures. ZUNIGA v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF CITY OF LOS ANGELES. On March 9, the state filed a motion to quash that subpoena. The facts alleged here cross the line. But a city can also decide that it wishes to adopt its own charter, which is essentially a local government constitution. You have the option of filing a complaint with a federal or state housing authority before filing a lawsuit (although you are not required to). The Johnson court explained that section 820.2 immunity is reserved for basic policy decisions which have been expressly committed to certain branches of the government, as to which judicial interference would be unseemly and interfere with that body's decision making process. 576.). In addition, there were prior allegation reports of the same behavior against previous tenants. After a fire set by arsonists killed five members of the family, the surviving members (appellants) filed a lawsuit against the Authority and the City of Los Angeles (the City) for: (1) negligence; (2) negligent supervision; (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (4) negligent infliction of emotional distress; (5) wrongful death; (6) loss of consortium; (7) breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment; (8) nuisance, and (9) federal civil rights violations pursuant to Title 42, United States Code section 1983. To sustain an action under section 1983, a plaintiff must show that (1) he or she possessed a constitutional right of which he or she was deprived; (2) that the municipality had a policy which amounted to deliberate indifference to the plaintiff's constitutional right; and (3) that action pursuant to that policy caused a violation of that constitutional right. It must also be borne in mind that in making this determination, we must construe the allegations of the complaint liberally. A: The only reason to make a federal case out of this dispute is if there is some question of federal law at issue. The girl's parents filed a complaint naming the therapists, among others. As the California Supreme Court put it as far back as 1976, municipalities are not isolated islands remote from the needs and problems of the area in which they are located.. For purposes of this appeal, we accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true. 123.) One of its primary purposes is to provide affordable housing. Mich.). The lawsuit challenges the unconstitutional surveillance network of over eighty cameras on nearly 200 homes at Highland Dwellings that could capture intimate details on public housing residents there. width: 100%; A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Find out how to file a complaint about a landlord, mortgage, or housing discrimination. (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 792, 802, 223 Cal.Rptr. Pa.). (830, subd. (Yue v. City of Auburn (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 751, 757, 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 653.). A lot happens from the time a 911 call is received until a patient reaches a hospital bed. [] [] 34. She refused access several times and asked DCHA for information about the cameras capabilities and purpose, but she never received an answer. Plaintiffs invoke the following California statutes as the basis for the defendants' liability for plaintiffs' state law claim: (a) Civil Code 1714(a) (negligence and duty of care); (b) Govt.Code 835835.4 (maintenance of dangerous condition); Civil Code 347980 (nuisance); Civ.Code 377 (wrongful death); Govt.Code 814 (breach of contract); Govt.Code 815.6 (failure to execute mandatory duty); and Govt.Code 815.2 (government entity respondeat superior liability for all tortious acts and omissions of employees within the scope of employment)., We find the complaint sufficiently identifies the factual and statutory bases upon which liability is premised. Defendant City is sued on Causes of Action 1 through 9 in its own right and on the basis of respondeat superior. Huntington Beach is arguing that many decades-old state housing laws actually violate the U.S. Constitution, and so thats why those claims are in federal court. Unlike the majority of these cases, here, however, we have allegations of the same perpetrators, the same location, and an escalating pattern of behavior over a period of time, with repeated reports to the landlord, visits by the landlord's personnel and an acknowledgment of the identity of the perpetrators by the policing personnel. A federal judge has ruled that two civil lawsuits may proceed after public housing residents sued the city of Annapolis and the city's housing authority, claiming failures in inspection policies . While the applicability of section 845 depends on how the case is ultimately presented at trial, the complaint alleges more than a failure to provide police protection. As promised, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors has filed a lawsuit against California as part of their latest effort to preserve the name of a foothill community now called Yokuts Valley.. In December, 2002, based on that previous tenancy, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against SFHA and related defendants, McColm v. San Francisco House Authority, et al., C 02-5810 PJH, alleging, among other things, racial and disability discrimination, harassment and retaliation for complaints of disability discrimination. Your California Privacy Rights/Privacy Policy. The case was referred to the Division after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination. For example, if the HOA fails to maintain the common areas, then a homeowner may be able to sue them under a breach of contract theory. The Authority and the City each filed separate demurrers to the complaint which were sustained without leave to amend on March 5, 1993.1 Appellants filed a notice of appeal on April 23, 1993, from the order sustaining the Demurrer of Defendant Housing Authority and the Demurrer of Defendant City of Los Angeles entered on March 5, 1993. We reverse. 8, 73 Cal.Rptr. A Voluntary Compliance Agreement will obtain assurances from the Program to remedy any violations and ensure that the Program will not violate the rights of other persons under fair housing or civil rights authorities. [Citations.] 13-cv-4165 (E.D.N.Y. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. The Justice Department announced today that it has filed a lawsuit alleging that the Housing Authority of the Town of Lone Wolf, Oklahoma, along with its former employees, David Haynes and Myrna Hess, violated the Fair Housing Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when they denied housing to an African-American applicant and her young Cal. 796797, 73 Cal.Rptr. From these cases, we glean the following: To the extent that appellants allege damages from the City's and the Authority's failure to (1) provide sufficient numbers of police personnel to patrol that particular housing project; (2) combat vandalism and terrorism by drug dealers (Gates v. Superior Court (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 481, 490493, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 489); (3) provide police protection at certain hours or in certain areas (Slapin v. Los Angeles International Airport, supra, 65 Cal.App.3d at p. 487, 135 Cal.Rptr. Learn where to complain about discrimination if you are trying to rent housing. (17 Cal.3d at pp. In Lopez v. Southern Cal. While the judge deliberates on these matters, Johnson remains in Chatham County Detention Center, awaiting a decision on whether his request for $15,000 bond is granted. Dec 31, 2019. 2013) and consistent with its Office of Mental Healths determination that Adult Homes are not clinically appropriate settings for individuals with SMI, nor are they conducive to the rehabilitation or recovery of such persons. The Statement of Interest explains that the regulation does not violate the Fair Housing Act or the Americans with Disabilities Act. The demurrer was based on the following arguments: (1) that appellants did not allege the requisite statutory basis for liability; (2) that the Authority is immune to this action; (3) that the Authority owed appellants no special duty; (4) that the claim is untimely under the Tort Claims Act; (5) that emotional distress is not actionable; (6) that loss of consortium damages are not available to the majority of the appellants, and (7) that no cause of action for violation of federal civil rights had been stated. Housing | (Health & Saf.Code, 34311, 34312.) The original lawsuit against the Chicopee Housing Authority and Executive Director Monica Blazic filed in April alleged that the authority failed to make reasonable accommodations and discriminated against a second-floor tenant with kidney disease who wanted to move to a first-floor unit so she could receive dialysis at home. 1 of 2. A DCHA police officer stated that she did not have any rights as a public housing resident, and that she could not stop the worker from installing the cameras. The Hayes case involved an attack by unknown assailants on a stretch of beach known for its criminal activity. Company: Holland & Knights West Coast land use and environmental law practice. [A] public entity is liable for injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property if (1) the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury; (2) the dangerous condition proximately caused the injury; (3) the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury which was incurred; and (4)(a) a negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment created the condition or (b) the public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition in time to have taken measures to protect against it. Instead, she fell prey to the same type of criminal conduct which had repeatedly been inflicted upon other tenants by the same assailant, a person whose appearance and modus operandi were known to respondents. Any agreement is voluntary; no party is required to accept an offer. The case challenges the NYPD's practices of unlawful stops and arrests of NYCHA residents and their visitors for . On February 24, 2022, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in the case of Oceanview v. Zucker Oceanview challenges a New York State regulation limiting admission of individuals with Serious Mental Illness (SMI) into segregated settings called Adult Homes, by alleging that the regulation violates the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. HUD may gather evidence in many ways, including interviewing parties and witnesses, getting documents, and inspecting properties. However, section 830.2 provides that: A condition is not a dangerous condition within the meaning of this chapter if the trial or appellate court, viewing the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff, determines as a matter of law that the risk created by the condition was of such a minor, trivial or insignificant nature in view of the surrounding circumstances that no reasonable person would conclude that the condition created a substantial risk of injury when such property or adjacent property was used with due care in a manner in which it was reasonably foreseeable that it would be used. (Peterson v. San Francisco Community College Dist., supra, 36 Cal.3d at p. 810, fn. Not only did respondents allegedly fail to provide adequate security, they did not warn appellant about the suspected assailant and they actually misrepresented the security measures in force. CBS Philadelphia also uncovered exclusive information. border: 1; Before sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal government site. It is clear from the complaint that the violence increased simply by virtue of appellants reporting the incidents to the Authority and police. Even if a federal court does hear those claims, I wouldnt expect this to change the outcome considerably. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. table, td, th { 3 min read. Other decisions confirm that laws like the Housing Element law (requiring municipalities to plan for future housing needs), and state laws regarding housing discrimination and accessory dwelling units also apply to charter cities. of Transportation (1979) 100 Cal.App.3d 980, 983, 161 Cal.Rptr. ), A dangerous condition is a condition of property that creates a substantial risk of injury when such property is used with due care in a manner which is reasonably foreseeable. 840, 710 P.2d 907.). The Authority contends that appellants have not shown that they have a constitutional right to safe and sanitary public housing. (879 F.2d at p. The Supreme Court, relying on Johnson and Tarasoff, found that a bus driver's decision not to protect passengers is not a basic policy decision and does not rise to the level of governmental decisions calling for judicial restraint; and that therefore, no immunity existed. Susman v. City of Los Angeles (1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 803, 75 Cal.Rptr. In order to be liable under section 835, the public entity must be the owner or in control of the property at the time of the injury. The Authority also claimed in its demurrer that Juan Antonio Lopez, Andres Zuniga, Pablo Zuniga and Juan Zuniga, Jr. were precluded from recovering under the fourth cause of action for emotional distress because they did not observe the injury-producing event. Q: Can charter cities ignore state housing laws? Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. (See e.g. 14, 551 P.2d 334. HUD will assign one or more investigators to investigate the allegations made in the complaint. from UC Berkeley School of Law, bachelors from Vassar College. You must file your lawsuit within two (2) years of the most recent date of alleged discriminatory action. 865, 771 P.2d 814. The State issued the regulation in conjunction with the United States settlement under Title II of the ADA in U.S. v. New York, No. We conclude that the pleading sufficiently alleges a dangerous condition to the property to overcome a demurrer. The troubles came to a head in 2019 when dozens of public housing residents filed a federal lawsuit against the city and the housing authority, claiming decades of racial discrimination. (N. Md. [Citations. On May 31, 2022, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in the consolidated case of Residents and Families/Empire v. Zucker. Among other things, HUD can initiate an enforcement proceeding before an Administrative Law Judge or refer the matter to the Department of Justice and recommend that it bring an enforcement action in Federal Court. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal, holding that allegations in the complaint regarding the acts of a school board in voting to terminate sufficiently described discretionary acts that were immune under section 820.2, and that the trial court therefore correctly sustained the demurrer. On March 13, 2023, the Justice Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau filed a Statement of Interest in Connolly v. Lanham (D. Copyright 2022 by WTOP. ), In its most recent pronouncement on this issue, the Ninth Circuit explained in U.S. v. Koon (9th Cir.1994) 34 F.3d 1416 (cert. ), In Peterson v. San Francisco Community College Dist. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. 500),6 failed to arrest or reprimand the perpetrators once they were apprised of the nature of the offenses (see Clemente v. State of California (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 374, 161 Cal.Rptr. They were headed to a parking garage to get into Gonzalez's vehicle and return home to South Carolina. ] (Slapin v. Los Angeles International Airport (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 484, 488, 135 Cal.Rptr. 799, affd. SPD officers charged Gonzalez with malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and two charges of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The seventh cause of action alleges that the Authority breached the covenant of quiet enjoyment implied in its lease agreement by [its] failure to construct barriers or take other adequate measures to keep the drug dealers and their associates from loitering and operating within the immediate vicinity of plaintiffs' home; its failure to provide and maintain adequate security on the premises so as to protect plaintiffs from the foreseeable risks of personal attacks and loss of personal property; and other negligent or improper conduct. The eighth cause of action for nuisance alleges that The conditions of the Jordan Downs Housing Project, and in particular the area in the immediate vicinity of plaintiffs' home, constituted a nuisance within, but not limited to the meaning of Civil Code 3479 et seq., in that said conditions were injurious to the health and safety of each plaintiff and the public at large, indecent and offensive to the senses of each plaintiff and the public at large, and interfered substantially with each plaintiff's comfortable enjoyment of the premises. The Authority erroneously cites Hayes v. State of California (1974) 11 Cal.3d 469, 113 Cal.Rptr. Contact the Webmaster to submit comments. The city and housing authority function as administrative arms of the state in pursuing the state concern effecting the legislative objective. (Id. ), John Doe v. Howard Zucker, M.D. 2013) and consistent with its Office of Mental Healths determination that Adult Homes are not clinically appropriate settings for individuals with SMI, nor are they conducive to the rehabilitation or recovery of such persons. The Statement of Interest explains that the regulation does not violate the Fair Housing Act. (1985) 40 Cal.3d 780, 795796, 221 Cal.Rptr.