University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Nozzi v. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles PH-CA-0002
Docket / Court CV 07-00380 GW ( C.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Public Housing
Attorney Organization Kaye, McLane, Bednarski & Litt
Case Summary
On January 16, 2007, two recipients of federal benefits under the Section 8 Housing Voucher Program and a non-profit advocacy organization filed a lawsuit in the Central District Court of California. The plaintiff sued the Housing Authority of Los Angeles under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff, ... read more >
On January 16, 2007, two recipients of federal benefits under the Section 8 Housing Voucher Program and a non-profit advocacy organization filed a lawsuit in the Central District Court of California. The plaintiff sued the Housing Authority of Los Angeles under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff, represented by private counsel, claimed that the Authority had violated due process by altering housing benefits to voucher recipients without adequate notice. The plaintiff claimed that the Authority violated six due process and federal regulations by failing to provide proper notice of Section 8 rent increases, which would affect approximately 22,000 tenants receiving federal benefits.

The Section 8 Housing Voucher Program was designed to aid low-income families in acquiring housing by subsidizing private landlords who rented to low-income tenants. In 2004, the defendant proposed cutting back on these federal subsidies in order to meet a federally-set budget. The changes were announced publicly, and would not take effect until April 2005. Individual tenants would not be subject to new regulations until their next annual evaluation, unless they moved before that time.

On November 26, 2007, the Court (Judge George H. Wu) ruled in favor of the defendants on a cross-motion for summary judgment. The court found that the plaintiff's five causes of action did not support a due process claim.

The plaintiff appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit, where it was again dismissed. A second appeal is pending.

Asma Husain - 11/02/2015


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Due Process
Defendant-type
Housing Authority
General
Housing
Housing assistance
Public benefits (includes, e.g., in-state tuition, govt. jobs)
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
Plaintiff Description Two recipients of federal benefits under the Section 8 Housing Voucher Program and a non-profit advocacy organization.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations Kaye, McLane, Bednarski & Litt
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Pending
Prevailing Party Defendant
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief None yet
None
Source of Relief None yet
None
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Yes
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Insurer Must Pay $100.5 Million in Redlining Case
The New York Times
Written: Oct. 27, 1998
By: Joseph B. Treaster
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Nationwide Settles Virginia Redlining Suit
Property Casualty 360
Written: May. 06, 2000
By: Amanda Levin
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Urban Institute Baseline Assessment of Public Housing Desegregation Cases
By: George Galster et al. (Urban Institute, Housing and Urban Development (HUD))
Citation: (2000)
[ Detail ] [ PDF ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:07−cv−00380−GW−FFM (C.D. Cal.) 09/11/2015
PH-CA-0002-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order Dismissing Original Complaint 05/23/2007 (C.D. Cal.)
PH-CA-0002-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Ruling on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment 03/08/2009 (C.D. Cal.)
PH-CA-0002-0002.pdf | Detail
Judgment in Favor of Defendants 03/25/2009 (C.D. Cal.)
PH-CA-0002-0003.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judgment in Favor of Defendants (2) 06/12/2013 (C.D. Cal.)
PH-CA-0002-0004.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Wu, George H. (C.D. Cal.)
PH-CA-0002-0001 | PH-CA-0002-0002 | PH-CA-0002-0003 | PH-CA-0002-0004 | PH-CA-0002-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Estuar, Paul J. (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Grunfeld, Daniel (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Kwoh, Stewart (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Litt, Barrett S. (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Rafti, Louis A (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Su, Julie A (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Vera, Hernan D. (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Dveirin, Brant H. (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Jones, Heather Elayne (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Leung, Todd T. (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Pisano, Christopher M. (California)
PH-CA-0002-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -