NYCHA Tenants and Guests Claim Unlawful "Stop and Frisk" Actions by NYPD

Plaintiffs, who were NYCHA tenants and their guests, sued the City of New York and NYCHA, claiming that the NYPD used unlawful stops, searches, and arrests to enforce prohibitions against trespassing in NYCHA buildings. They claimed that these "stop and frisk" practices violated the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and Civil Rights Acts, the United Housing Act (USHA), and city and state laws. They also claimed that these practices discriminated against African Americans and Latinos in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Both sides asked the court to rule in their favor without a trial, with mixed results. The court granted the city's request to dismiss plaintiffs' NYSC claims, as well as NYCHA's request to dismiss certain race discrimination claims. But the court denied requests by the city and plaintiffs to rule on Fourth Amendment claims without a trial. The court also denied the city's request to dismiss plaintiffs' Fourteenth Amendment and FHA claims, as well as NYCHA's request to dismiss plaintiffs' USHA claim.  A trial was needed to determine the facts and liability on a number of questions.  Plaintiffs could proceed with their claims that NYPD officers stopped individuals at NYCHA buildings without individualized suspicion and arrested them without probable cause, that there was racial discrimination, and that their housing rights were violated.

Davis v. City of New York: Index No. 10-CV-0699, 2013 WL 1288176 (SDNY; 3/28/13; Scheindlin, DJ)