Georgia high court weighs limits on tenant claims against housing authorities

Legal experts warned the decision could have wide-ranging impacts on residents who live in public housing, and prevent them from fighting back against negligent landlords in a state with some of the weakest tenant protections in the country.

But when Guy appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, the Housing Authority of the City of Augusta and other authorities in the state said overturning the ruling could open the “floodgates” to premises liability litigation.

“Without immunity, every criminal act on or near a Public Housing Agency property can inevitably result in a lawsuit,” the housing authority argued in a February court filing.

At a morning session Tuesday, Atlanta attorney Kyle Califf urged on behalf of Guy for the court to find housing authorities are not entitled to sovereign immunity — the legal doctrine shielding government entities from liability.

Califf argued the housing authority is not a department, agency, county or municipality under Georgia’s Constitution and, as such, does not enjoy that level of protection.

In Georgia, state and local governments, including departments and agencies, typically have sovereign immunity unless the Georgia General Assembly waives it.

The attorney told the justices that housing authorities are independent agencies distinct from municipal departments and are not extensions of the state or cities.

Though housing authorities are established under state law, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulates them and provides federal funding — though they may be subject to some local oversight as public corporations.

Califf noted that the appeals court had come to a novel finding in the case: that as an “instrumentality of a municipal corporation,” the housing authority was entitled to immunity.

“The problem with that is that neither the court, the housing authority nor anyone else that I’m aware of has ever identified any kind of case law, any statute ... that would confer immunity to a separately incorporated instrumentality of a municipal corporation. This is a brand new thing,” Califf told the panel.

Justice Carla Wong McMillian, appointed by Gov. Brian Kemp, asked Califf how the court should distinguish between a housing authority and other municipal entities, like police and public works departments.

“Wouldn’t the actions of a road department also be … covered by municipal immunity?” McMillian asked.

“It would if the road department was part of the city. The distinction in this case is that the housing authority is not the city of Augusta. It’s a wholly separate entity,” Califf said.

On the other hand, the housing authority’s lawyer, Christopher A. Cosper, suggested all government entities, including housing authorities, are shielded.

Credit: TNS

Credit: TNS

Cosper told the justices that public housing is a “state problem.” Furthermore, his argument was based on 300 years of precedent, and kings’ immunity under English common law, he said.

“It’s the government’s immunity, which probably at this point goes up to the state, and then the state immunity flows down to the agency,” Cosper said.

During the course of the argument, some justices on the panel expressed skepticism.

“You’re proposing a one-size-fits-all government immunity that I’m unfamiliar with,” said Presiding Justice Sarah Hawkins Warren, an appointee of Republican Gov. Nathan Deal.

Prior to Tuesday’s arguments, several interested parties filed briefs in support of Guy or the housing authority.

Like Califf, the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association warned upholding the court’s ruling in favor of the housing authority would bar “thousands of low-income Georgians from seeking redress from their landlords’ negligence.”

Even if the housing authority did have municipal immunity, “the business of managing apartments is not a ‘legislative or judicial’ function that should enjoy complete sovereign immunity from tenants in Georgia courts,” the association said in a Feb. 21 brief.

The housing authorities of Macon-Bibb County, Columbus and the City of Decatur argued in their brief that without immunity a flood of lawsuits would “significantly affect the availability of affordable housing in Georgia.”