Since 1978 · Attorney Advertising
Perez v. NYCHA: public holdings (what belongs on the NYCHA page vs this note)
In Perez v. New York City Housing Authority, 304 A.D.2d 736, 757 N.Y.S.2d 799 (2d Dep’t 2003), the Appellate Division, Second Department, addressed how a final Department of Health lead-paint determination can affect later NYCHA lead litigation. The court also left causation and injury for trial, upholding the denial of summary judgment to both sides.
Caption
Perez v. New York City Housing Authority, 304 A.D.2d 736, 757 N.Y.S.2d 799 (2d Dep’t 2003) — Second Department decision on Department of Health lead-paint findings in later NYCHA litigation, and on summary judgment where causation and injury remained disputed.
This firm litigated Perez for the plaintiffs. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
What the Second Department held
NYCHA’s motion for summary judgment was denied. The plaintiffs’ cross-motion on liability was also denied. Questions of fact on causation and injury remained for trial. The decision did not resolve liability for either side.
The Second Department also agreed with the trial court that the Department of Health’s final determination of 80 lead-paint violations in the subject apartment should be afforded collateral estoppel effect under the circumstances presented — NYCHA had failed to properly contest that determination under the Department’s rules.
Whether any one child’s claim succeeds still depends on the facts of that case. Reported decisions such as Perez address how Department of Health lead findings can affect later litigation; they do not decide the next family’s outcome.
What belongs on the NYCHA page vs this note
Practical guidance for NYCHA families — what to photograph, how to report, Self-Service Portal and Customer Contact Center steps, and where Notice of Claim timing questions fit — stays on the firm’s NYCHA public housing page.
This note covers only what Perez held and what one appellate decision can and cannot tell a family about its own case.
More on collateral estoppel
The firm’s longer article explains the doctrine and the Department of Health’s Order to Abate, including the limited time a landlord has to contest it, and uses Perez as a case study. For that fuller treatment, see collateral estoppel and its application in housing and health law.
What this means for parents
Keep Health Department papers, inspection and abatement records, and any NYCHA correspondence about lead or repairs. For what to photograph, report, and keep in NYCHA housing, see the firm’s NYCHA public housing page. Deadlines can turn on who owns or runs the building — for City, NYCHA, and school notice rules, see time limits. Some of those deadlines are short.
For the firm’s summary of major New York lead decisions, including Perez and other appellate rulings, see landmark cases. J.A. v. Mandy Associates, a 2025 First Department decision, focuses on the kind of question Perez left for trial: whether lead exposure caused a child’s claimed injuries. For how notice and negligence work against a private landlord, see landlord liability.
Talk with the firm
Call The Frankel Law Firm at (212) 888-5100. There is no fee to speak with us or for us to evaluate your potential case. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Related pages
A telephone call or online inquiry does not create an attorney-client relationship. The firm represents a client only if it agrees to do so. Please do not send medical records until representation has been agreed. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.