992 F. Supp. 2d 481
E.D. Pa.2014Background
- PHA moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Second Amended Complaint.
- McField, through Ravonnia Ray, sues under 42 U.S.C. §1983 alleging violations of USHA, LBPPPA, and RLBPHRA, plus Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
- Plaintiff also asserts state-law claims against Cassidy, the landlord, for negligence, recklessness, and breach of warranty.
- PHA leased with Cassidy under a HAP contract tied to the Section 8 program; Ray entered into a two-year lease in 2006 with Cassidy with a lead-paint disclosure requirement.
- PHA inspections in 2009 noted HQS deficiencies but did not identify lead hazards; DOH later found lead paint on the property and ordered remediation.
- Plaintiff alleges lead exposure caused McField’s brain damage; the DOH and subsequent events led to relocation in 2009.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether USHA, LBPPPA, and RLBPHRA create private rights under §1983 | McField seeks private rights under these statutes. | PHA argues statutes do not create enforceable private rights. | Statutes do not create privately enforceable rights under §1983. |
| Whether the statutory provisions create a private right by structure and language | Plaintiff contends statutory scheme conveys rights to tenants. | Defendant maintains statutes regulate agencies, not individuals. | No private right inferred from statute structure. |
| Whether state-created danger and due process claims survive | Plaintiff seeks due process via state-created danger theory. | PHA challenges sufficiency of danger/causation. | State-created danger claim dismissed; due process claim not viable. |
| Whether Equal Protection claim is actionable under §1983 | Plaintiff asserts discriminatory treatment. | No evidence of purposeful discrimination or similarly situated comparators. | Equal protection claim dismissed. |
| Whether Monell liability attaches given no underlying §1983 violation | Monell can lie even without individual §1983 violation. | No underlying constitutional/statutory violation, so no Monell liability. | Monell claim dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzaga University v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002) (unambiguously conferred rights required for §1983)
- Blessing v. Freestone, 520 U.S. 329 (1997) (three-factor Blessing test re private rights under spending laws)
- Three Rivers Center for Ind. Living v. Housing Auth. of City of Pittsburgh, 382 F.3d 412 (3d Cir. 2004) (regulations create rights only insofar as they construe a statute's personal right)
- Sabree ex rel. Sabree v. Richman, 367 F.3d 180 (3d Cir. 2004) (Gonzaga-based analysis; look to rights-creating terms)
- Sandoval v. County of Hood, 532 U.S. 275 (2001) (regulations cannot create private §1983 rights absent statute)
- Wright v. City of Roanoke Redev. and Housing Auth., 479 U.S. 416 (1987) (statutory rights must be explicit; focus on individual rights)
- Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498 (1990) (implied private rights doctrine; separation of powers context)