A state appeals court has revived a class action lawsuit filed by residents claiming the New York City Housing Authority failed to provide heat and hot water during a long, cold winter.

The Appellate Division, First Department, panel justices unanimously reversed New York County Supreme Court Judge Carol Edmead's dismissal of Diamond v. New York City Housing Authority. The panel in its decision Tuesday certified the class for the lawsuit and reinstated a claim for breach of the warranty of habitability.

The complaint was filed in April 2018 demanding that the agency issue rent abatements to residents who two years ago went without heat and hot water for weeks, specifically a cold spell that lasted from Dec. 27, 2017, to Jan. 16, 2018.

The panel—Justices Sallie Manzanet-Daniels, Ellen Gesmer, Jeffrey K. Oing, Peter H. Moulton, and Lizbeth Gonzalez—reversed the below ruling that state and federal law conflicted, thus requiring residents to litigate separately.

"Unless Congress manifestly and clearly intends to preempt the States' exercise of jurisdiction over matters relating to the welfare of their citizens under the Supremacy Clause of article VI of the Constitution, the States' police powers are not superseded by federal law," the justices said.

The justices also suggested that the housing authority had already acknowledged that the plaintiffs had a viable case.

"NYCHA conceded that 80% of its housing units experienced heat and/or hot water outages during the relevant period, which demonstrates that the problems that affected each class member were system-wide," the justices said. "Thus, much of the proof will likely concern NYCHA's overall deficiencies, rather than the breakdown of individual heating systems in individual buildings."

The housing authority was represented by Miriam Skolnik of Herzfeld & Rubin. A spokesperson for NYCHA noted the appellate division did find some agreement with the authority.

"NYCHA will abide by the decision of the Appellate Division First Department that affirmed the lower court's ruling dismissing plaintiffs' claim for injunctive relief but reinstated plaintiffs' claim for breach of warranty of habitability and certified a class with respect to this issue," the spokesperson said. "We will now address these claims in the lower court."

The plaintiffs' counsel welcomed the news.

"Forcing hundreds of thousands of NYCHA tenants to pursue individual breach of contract claims in Civil Court is not a just or reasonable approach, and we are pleased the Appellate court agreed," Mary Eaton, a partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, said in a news release Wednesday. "It is time for NYCHA to pay for its failure to abide by its legal obligations to provide adequate heat and hot water to its tenants."

Eaton, Wesley Powell and Shaimaa Hussein of Willkie, represent the plaintiffs along with Judith Goldiner and Lucy Newman of the Legal Aid Society.

"As we have maintained, NYCHA has a legal and moral obligation to ensure that heat and hot water systems are functioning properly, and when that promise is broken, there is a price that must be paid," Newman said in the joint news release with Eaton. "We welcome this decision and look forward to securing these rebates for our clients and other NYCHA tenants who suffered essential utility outages during the coldest time in recent memory."