Ramos v. Department of Homeless Services
1:22-cv-03959
S.D.N.Y.Nov 22, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Jose Antonio Ramos, a pro se litigant, sued Breaking Ground and the City of New York after staying in temporary supportive housing at 123 East 15th Street.
- Ramos alleged he was denied permanent housing despite meeting requirements and claimed discrimination against himself and other Hispanic and/or disabled residents.
- Plaintiff also raised safety concerns regarding lack of safety features in showers and bathrooms, and alleged harassment by staff.
- After some initial claims on behalf of others were dismissed, Ramos twice sought injunctive relief to stop alleged harassment and property removal.
- Defendants moved to dismiss for reasons including untimely or improper service and failure to state a viable claim.
- The court considered motions to dismiss by both defendants and a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction by Ramos.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to Provide Permanent Housing | Ramos was entitled to permanent housing and others received it more quickly without justification | Plaintiff failed to state a plausible entitlement to relief; service issues | Plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts; case dismissed |
| Disability Discrimination (FHA/ADA/Rehab Act) | Denial of adequate living conditions amounted to discrimination based on "handicap" | No qualifying disability alleged; no accommodation requested | Plaintiff did not allege a disability that substantially limits life activities; claim dismissed |
| Racial Discrimination (FHA) | Hispanic residents denied housing while Black and White residents received it | No direct/indirect evidence plaintiff was similarly situated to those granted housing | No facts showing similarly situated comparators; claim dismissed |
| Preliminary Injunction/TRO | Needed to prevent harassment and property removal | No likelihood of success; no irreparable harm shown | No likelihood of success on merits; injunction denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (sets pleading standard for plausibility in Rule 12(b)(6) context)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (distinguishes factual allegations from legal conclusions for motions to dismiss)
- Freedom Holdings, Inc. v. Spitzer, 408 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 2005) (irreparable harm is a requirement for preliminary injunctions)
- Littlejohn v. City of New York, 795 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2015) (defines "similarly situated" standard for discrimination claims)