Shine v. New York City Housing Authority
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-04347-RA
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shine v. New York City Housing Authority, Judge Abrams gave Shine one more chance to amend disability-discrimination allegations after pleading deficiencies remained.
Wendy Shine, her minor child C.W., and the New York City Housing Authority.
What happened
Wendy Shine sued the New York City Housing Authority on behalf of herself and her minor child, C.W., alleging that the agency failed to effectively remove mold from their public-housing apartment. She claimed this violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and state law.
The court had previously dismissed her complaint because it did not plausibly allege that the agency failed to reasonably accommodate a disability. After Shine filed an amended complaint, the court found that it still did not adequately address the earlier pleading problems.
The court allowed Shine one more opportunity to amend her complaint to state a federal disability-discrimination claim. Judge Abrams required her to explain what NYCHA representatives knew or should have known about the alleged disabilities, when they received that information, what information they received, and who received it. The court set June 25, 2021, as the deadline for a second amended complaint.
The detailed version
- Shine v. New York City Housing Authority · No. 1:19-cv-04347-RA
- Ronnie Abrams
- June 2, 2021
Background
Wendy Shine brought the action individually and on behalf of her minor child, C.W., against the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA). She alleged that NYCHA’s failure to effectively abate mold in her public-housing apartment violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and state law.
In an earlier ruling in this case, the court granted NYCHA’s motion to dismiss because Shine had not plausibly stated a claim that NYCHA failed to reasonably accommodate a disability. The court allowed her to amend and directed her to add facts showing how her alleged physical impairments substantially limited major life activities and whether NYCHA knew or reasonably should have known about the alleged disabilities of Shine and C.W.
Court’s Analysis
After Shine filed a First Amended Complaint, NYCHA moved to dismiss it. The court stated that the amended complaint still failed to adequately address the pleading deficiencies identified in the earlier ruling. The order focused on the need for more specific facts about NYCHA’s knowledge of the alleged disabilities, including the timeframe of any notifications, the information provided, and the identity of the NYCHA representative who was notified.
Disposition
The court allowed Shine one more opportunity to amend her complaint so that she could plausibly allege a federal disability-discrimination claim. If she chose to file a Second Amended Complaint, the court required her to do so by June 25, 2021. The court also ordered Shine’s counsel to show her the order. The order does not expressly state how the pending motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint was resolved. Judge Ronnie Abrams signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.