Miranda v. York Hill Housing, Inc.

Background

Evan Miranda and Evelyn Perez filed the action without attorneys. They invoked federal-question jurisdiction and sought damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief. The court construed the complaint as asserting claims under the Fair Housing Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and state law. The defendants are Yorkhill Housing Inc., identified as the plaintiffs’ landlord; First Service Residential, identified as Yorkhill’s building-management agent; and the New York City Department of Housing, Preservation, and Development.

Representation of Perez

The court explained that federal law allows a person to represent himself or herself, but a nonlawyer cannot bring a lawsuit on behalf of another person. Because the opinion does not allege that Miranda is an attorney, the court dismissed without prejudice any claims Miranda asserted on Perez’s behalf. This left Miranda able to assert his own claims and Perez able to assert her own claims.

Because Perez filed a signed signature page for the complaint and her own completed and signed application to proceed without paying filing fees, the court construed the complaint as asserting separate claims by Miranda and Perez, each acting on their own behalf.

Filing-fee status and service

The court stated that it had granted both plaintiffs permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees in an order dated January 22, 2025. As plaintiffs proceeding under that permission, they were entitled to assistance from the court and the United States Marshals Service in serving the defendants.

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for each defendant, complete a USM-285 process-receipt-and-return form for each defendant, and provide the necessary documents to the Marshals Service so it could serve the summonses and complaint. The court extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses were issued. If service was not completed within that period, the plaintiffs were instructed to request an extension of time. The plaintiffs were also told to notify the court in writing of any address change.

Disposition

Judge Jeannette A. Vargas dismissed without prejudice the claims Miranda asserted on Perez’s behalf, construed the complaint as containing each plaintiff’s own claims, and directed service on all defendants. The order did not decide whether the Fair Housing Act, Rehabilitation Act, or state-law claims were legally valid.