Avila v. Promesa, Inc.

Background

Jimmy Avila proceeded without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. After the court dismissed his original complaint but allowed him to amend, Avila filed an amended complaint and a later letter that the court treated as a supplement. He asserted claims under the Fair Housing Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as claims under state law. He sought damages, injunctive relief, and declaratory relief.

Avila named Promesa, Inc.; Basics, Inc.; Lymaris Albors; Aja Douglas; 1412 Col LLC; Caren Abate; the New York State Office of Mental Health; Jamar Crow; Charles Staten; JSAF Management; and Joseph Safdie. He alleged, among other things, that housing-related defendants withheld apartment keys, refused to collect rent, partially evicted him, and failed to honor a relocation agreement. He also alleged that Crow and Staten made false statements that led to his arrest, that Basics unnecessarily hospitalized him, and that Abate and the state mental-health agency failed to arrange appropriate housing accommodations.

Court’s reasoning and rulings

The court first dismissed, without prejudice to prosecution in other related actions, any claims that overlapped with claims arising from Avila’s former residence or claims against Douglas or Abate that he had asserted in previously filed pending actions.

The court dismissed Avila’s Fair Housing Act disability-discrimination claims against Promesa, Basics, Albors, Douglas, 1412 Col LLC, Crow, Staten, JSAF Management, and Safdie for failure to state a claim. It held that Avila did not allege facts showing that his disability was a motivating factor in the conduct underlying those claims.

The court dismissed the Rehabilitation Act claims against Promesa, Basics, the New York State Office of Mental Health, JSAF Management, and 1412 Col LLC for failure to state a claim. The court noted that Avila alleged federal funding for Promesa and Basics but not for the other defendants. It nevertheless concluded that the claims failed because Avila did not allege facts showing that any defendant denied him an opportunity to participate in or benefit from services, programs, or activities, or otherwise discriminated against him because of his disability.

The court dismissed Avila’s claims under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act against the New York State Office of Mental Health for failure to state a claim. It found that he had not alleged facts showing that the agency denied him access to its services, programs, or activities, or otherwise discriminated against him because of his disability.

The court dismissed claims under Section 1983 and state law against the New York State Office of Mental Health, a New York State agency, and certain claims against Abate in her official capacity because of immunity under the Eleventh Amendment and lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. It also dismissed retrospective declaratory-relief claims against Abate in her official capacity on the same basis. The court dismissed prospective injunctive-relief claims against Abate in her official capacity for failure to state a claim because there is no federal constitutional right to housing benefits or housing assistance.

The court dismissed Avila’s Section 1983 claims against Abate in her individual capacity because he did not allege facts showing her direct and personal involvement in violations of his federal constitutional rights. It dismissed the Section 1983 claims against the remaining defendants because they were private individuals or entities, and Avila did not allege facts showing that they acted as government actors.

After dismissing the federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning its authority to hear related state-law claims, over any remaining state-law claims. The court also declined to grant another opportunity to amend because Avila had already been allowed to amend and the court found that the defects could not be cured by another amendment.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action and directed the clerk to enter judgment. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Avila permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.