Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Renfroe v. Housing Authority of New Orleans
No. 03-3613 (E.D. La. filed, July 19, 2004) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55715
Description
Public Housing Tenants Complaint for Relocation Assistance Not Barred for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies
Abstract
The district court denied defendant housing authority’s
motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ suit to be compensated for
relocation cost. Defendant argued for dismissal on grounds that
plaintiff public housing tenants displaced from New Orleans housing
developments had not exhausted administrative remedies. In their
suit, plaintiffs alleged that, because redevelopment of their
public housing site was funded by HOPE VI (Homeownership and
Opportunity for People Everywhere), they were entitled to
protection under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1974, also known as the
Uniform Relocation Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4621 et seq.
Plaintiffs asserted that housing authority violated the Uniform
Relocation Act by failing to operate the relocation assistance
program adequately addressing the needs of displaced families.
Plaintiffs alleged that they did not receive supplemental utilities
allowance due them under the Uniform Relocation Act. Moving to
dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint and citing Wallace v.
Chicago Housing Authority, 298 F. Supp. 2d 710 (N.D. Ill.
2003) (Clearinghouse No. 55,072), defendants claimed that the
Administrative ProcedureAct was the exclusive remedy for Uniform
Relocation Act claims. The district court did not believe that
Wallace applied in this case. Citing Darby v. Cisneros,
113 S. Ct. 2539 (1993), the court explained that the Uniform
Relocation Act subchapter under which the case was brought did not
mandate an administrative appeal prior to judicial review.
