Summary
The Connecticut Supreme Court addressed whether state and federal fair housing statutes confer a private right of action to compel the state housing finance authority to prevent racial and economic segregation in low-income housing developments. Applying the Napoletano test for implied private rights of action under state law and the Gonzaga University standard for Section 1983 claims under federal law, the court examined legislative intent and statutory language. The court concluded that neither the state statute nor the federal provisions unambiguously confer individually enforceable rights, as enforcement was intended to be handled through executive and legislative oversight rather than judicial action. Accordingly, the court affirmed the trial court’s decision to strike the plaintiffs’ complaint.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether General Statutes §8‑37cc(b) creates a private right of action.
- Whether 42 U.S.C. §3608(d) creates an enforceable right under 42 U.S.C. §1983.
- Whether 26 C.F.R. §1.42‑9(a) provides a basis for a §1983 claim.
Holdings
- The court held that §8‑37cc(b) does not create an implied private right of action.
- The court held that §3608(d) does not create an unambiguously conferring individual right enforceable under §1983.
- The court held that because the regulation is grounded in §3608(d), which is not enforceable under §1983, the regulation likewise is not enforceable under §1983.
Key quotations
“Because a motion to strike challenges the legal sufficiency of a pleading and, consequently, requires no factual findings by the trial court, our review of the court’s ruling on the [defendant’s motion] is plenary.” (at 246)
Factual background
Brown, a low‑income African‑American resident of Asylum Hill, and the revitalization association sued the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority after it approved tax‑credit reservations that would concentrate low‑income families in the neighborhood. The authority failed to respond to a request for a declaratory ruling and the plaintiffs alleged violations of state and federal fair‑housing statutes.
Procedural history
The trial court struck all three counts of the plaintiffs' complaint after finding no private right of action under state or federal law. The plaintiffs appealed.