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
Valdez v. Town of Brookhaven
No. CV-05-4323 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2005) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55987
Description
Finding That Latino Day Laborers Established Likelihood of Success Under a Disparate Impact Theory That Town’s “No Notice, No Standards” Evictions Violate The Fair Housing Act, Court Preliminarily Enjoins Town from Seeking Ex Parte Orders Closing Premises
Abstract
Plaintiff Latino day-laborer residents of a Long Island town and
the Workplace Project, a nonprofit membership organization whose
mission is to end exploitation of immigrant laborers in Long
Island, sued the town, the town supervisor, the county and the
county supervisor over the town’s summary eviction of Latino
residents based on alleged threats to health and safety. In this
class action suit, plaintiffs state that the town established a new
program to enforce a 1999 local act purportedly passed to improve
conditions in rental housing. Plaintiffs allege that defendants
abandoned preexisting enforcement mechanisms of fines and court
actions against noncompliant landlords and opted instead, without
statutory or regulatory authority, to evict tenants without prior
notice through ex parte injunctions. Most of the over 100 people
evicted at filing, plaintiffs say, became homeless or were living
in worse housing. Plaintiffs say that the town normally took months
from the time it initially investigated housing code violations to
the time it applied for restraining orders—belying the
existence of an emergency warranting immediate action. Plaintiffs
claim that the town’s actions are discriminatory on the basis
of national origin, race, or color in violation of the Fair Housing
Act and their due process and equal protection rights under the
Fourteenth Amendment. Plaintiffs seek a temporary restraining
order, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief prohibiting the
“no notice, no standards” evictions, compensatory and
punitive damages for individual plaintiffs, and attorney fees.
