Imhof v. New York CIty Housing Authority
- John Cronan
- 1:23-cv-01880
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Imhof v. New York City Housing Authority, Judge Cronan identified two issues for the parties to address at a scheduled oral argument.
John Imhof and the defendants were required to prepare to address the two legal issues identified by the court at the scheduled oral argument.
What happened
In Imhof v. New York City Housing Authority, the court reviewed the parties’ supplemental briefs before an oral argument scheduled for June 9, 2025.
The court directed the parties to be prepared to discuss whether a 1992 Supreme Court decision affects the meaning of “personal injury” under the Federal Tort Claims Act, or FTCA. It also asked whether New York law treats Imhof’s claims under the New York City Human Rights Law as claims for “personal injury.”
Judge John P. Cronan did not decide those issues in this order. The order identified topics for discussion at the upcoming oral argument.
The detailed version
- Imhof v. New York CIty Housing Authority · No. 1:23-cv-01880
- John Cronan
- June 6, 2025
Nature of the Order
The court acknowledged receiving the parties’ supplemental briefs and listed two issues for discussion at the oral argument scheduled for June 9, 2025. This order does not state a ruling on the claims or resolve the identified legal questions.
Issues Identified by the Court
First, the court asked whether the Supreme Court’s analysis in United States v. Burke, 504 U.S. 229 (1992), is relevant to the meaning of “personal injury” under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The court noted Second Circuit authority stating that the FTCA applies only when there was a “personal injury” as defined by state law, and it cited decisions discussing whether courts in the Second Circuit are bound by that approach.
Second, the court asked whether New York law would classify Plaintiff’s claims under the New York City Human Rights Law as claims for “personal injury.” The order cited a New York statute defining “personal injury” and a New York Court of Appeals decision stating that human-rights claims are not tort actions or personal-injury claims for purposes of specified New York municipal-law provisions.
Disposition
Judge John P. Cronan ordered that the parties be prepared to thoroughly discuss these issues at oral argument. The order does not grant or deny a motion, dismiss claims, enter judgment, or decide whether the FTCA applies.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.