Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Gordon v. Bridgeport Housing Authority, 208 Conn. 161 (1988)

Citation
Gordon v. Bridgeport Housing Authority, 208 Conn. 161 (1988)
Parent Document
Gordon v. Bridgeport Housing Authority, 208 Conn. 161 (1988)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
1988-07-05

Other Sections in This Document (43)

Full Text

1,223 chars
In the context of a taxpayer standing issue, this court said: “The housing authority is a distinct corporate entity. Cum. Sup. 1955, § 437d. It is not an agency of *186the city of Hartford.” Austin v. Housing Authority, 143 Conn. 338, 349, 122 A.2d 399 (1956). “A municipal authority created under a municipal authorities statute has been regarded as a corporate agency of the state and not a creature, agent or representative of the municipality organizing it.” 1 E. McQuillin, supra, § 2.29a. Concerning a housing authority, the Rhode Island Supreme Court noted: “Once created it becomes an autonomous body, subject only to the limits of power imposed by law. . . . [They] are not instruments of the government created for its own uses or subject to its direct control.” Housing Authority v. Fetzik, 110 R.I. 26, 33, 289 A.2d 658 (1972). Moreover, the cooperation agreement between the city and the BHA, states that the BHA is a separate corporate entity “organized and existing under the laws of the State of Connecticut within the City of Bridgeport.” We conclude as a matter of law that part I of chapter 128 of the General Statutes does not establish an agency relationship between the city of Bridgeport and the BHA.