Lee v. N.Y.C.H.A.

Background

Brenda Lee, appearing without a lawyer, sued the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA). She alleged that events occurring in New York State from 1987 through the present included NYCHA denying or refusing her housing, defamation, breach of contract, and violations of her First Amendment and other constitutional rights. She sought housing, ownership of Andrew Jackson Houses, $5 million or a negotiable amount, and other relief.

The court had previously allowed Lee to proceed without paying filing fees in advance. It reviewed the complaint under the screening rules that require dismissal of a fee-free complaint that is frivolous, fails to state a claim, or seeks relief from an immune defendant.

Claims on Behalf of Other People

To the extent Lee asserted claims for family members or anyone else, the court dismissed those claims without prejudice. The court explained that a nonlawyer may represent herself but may not bring a lawsuit on behalf of another person.

Lee’s Federal Claims

The court understood Lee to assert claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of federal rights by a person acting under state law, against NYCHA.

The court held that the United States Constitution does not create a general right to housing benefits or assistance in obtaining housing. It therefore dismissed any § 1983 claims based on an alleged constitutional right to housing for failure to state a claim.

For Lee’s other alleged constitutional claims, the court explained that suing a local government entity requires facts showing that the entity’s own policy, custom, or practice caused the constitutional violation. The court found that Lee had not alleged facts showing that a NYCHA policy, custom, or practice caused a violation of her rights. It therefore dismissed her remaining § 1983 claims for failure to state a claim.

Because Lee was proceeding without a lawyer, the court granted her leave to replead her § 1983 claims against NYCHA in an amended complaint. The court specified that she could not replead claims based on a federal constitutional right to housing.

State-Law Claims

After dismissing the federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning its authority to hear related state-law claims, over Lee’s state-law claims. The court did not consider those claims under its supplemental jurisdiction.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action. It dismissed claims Lee asserted for other people without prejudice, dismissed Lee’s own federal claims under § 1983 for failure to state a claim, and declined to consider her own state-law claims under supplemental jurisdiction. The court granted Lee 30 days to file an amended complaint as specified in the order. It directed the Clerk of Court not to close the action at that time because Lee had permission to replead. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.