Housing and Civil Enforcement Cases
United States v. Mohamed Bacchus and Alan Zander (E.D. Pa.)
On February 1, 2022, the Court entered a consent order resolving United States v. Mohamed Bacchus and Alan Zander (E.D. Pa.), a Fair Housing Act (FHA) election complaint filed by the United States on August 18, 2021. The complaint alleges that defendants discriminated on the basis of familial status and disability related to their refusal to allow the complainant, who was recovering from addiction to alcohol, to move his pregnant girlfriend and her child into his unit. Under the consent order the defendants will pay a total of $75,000 to the complainant and his child and take actions directed towards preventing future unlawful discrimination, including undergoing training and implementing nondiscrimination policies on the FHA in connection with the rental and management of residential properties. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Peter Mccarthy and Steps to Solutions, Inc. (D. Mass.)
On May 24, 2024, the Court entered judgment on a May 17, 2024, jury verdict in United States v. Peter McCarthy and Steps to Solutions, Inc. (D. Mass.). The United States’ complaint, filed on August 11, 2021, alleged that Peter McCarthy, who operates a group of residential sober homes in or near Boston, Massachusetts through his company, Steps to Solutions, Inc., engaged in a pattern or practice of sexually harassment of residents of his sober homes in violation of the Fair Housing Act. After a five-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the United States, finding that from at least 2009 through 2021, the Defendant engaged in a pattern or practice of sexual harassment and denied rights protected by the Fair Housing Act to a group of persons. The jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages totaling $3,805,000 to seven aggrieved persons.
United States v. Perry Homes, Inc. (W.D. Pa.)
On January 3, 2023, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Perry Homes, Inc. (W.D. Pa.). The amended complaint, which was filed on October 8, 2021, alleged that defendants Perry Homes Inc., Robert Whittington and Allyson Whittington discriminated on the basis of disability in violation of the Fair Housing Act by implementing a policy of excluding emotional support animals from rental properties they owned or operated in Cranberry, Zelienople, and Harmony, Pennsylvania. The original complaint was filed on July 23, 2021. The case is based on a HUD complaint that was filed by Southwestern Pennsylvania Legal Services (“SWPLS”), a non-profit legal aid organization whose mission includes combating housing discrimination, after the organization conducted fair housing testing. The consent order requires the defendants to pay SWPLS $15,000 in damages, to comply with the Fair Housing Act, adopt a reasonable accommodation policy, publicize the policy in applications, leases, tenant renewals, and in its rental office, provide training for its employees, and comply with other equitable terms. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received the complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Black and White Garage, Inc. d/b/a Black and White Towing, Inc. (C.D. Cal.)
On August 9, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Black and White Garage, Inc. dba Black and White Towing (C.D. Cal.). The complaint, which was filed on July 20, 2021, alleges that a towing company violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) by illegally auctioning off a vehicle belonging to an active duty U.S. Marine. Under the consent decree, Black and White must adopt new policies and implement new training requirements, pay $22,000 in compensation to the Marine, and pay a $5,000 civil penalty to the U.S. Treasury.
United States v. Hideaway Village (E.D. Tenn.)
On September 15, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Hideaway Village Community Management Association et al. (E.D. Tenn.). On July 9, 2021, the United States filed the Fair Housing Act complaint and proposed consent order. The complaint alleges that the defendants discriminated on the basis of familial status by adopting and enforcing policies and practices that prohibited children from using the community pool without adult supervision. The consent order requires the defendants to pay $10,000 in monetary damages to the HUD complainants, attend fair housing training, and submit to other standard injunctive relief. This case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Fairfield Properties and Pinewood (E.D.N.Y.)
On June 30, 2021, the United States Attorney's Office filed a complaint and settlement agreement in United States v. Fairfield Properties (E.D.N.Y.). The complaint alleges that a 42-unit condominium association in Commack, New York and its property management company violated the Fair Housing Act by refusing to allow two tenants to live with an emotional assistance dog. The settlement agreement requires the defendants to pay $47,500 in damages to the tenants, attend fair housing training, and adopt a new reasonable accommodation policy. This case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Nelson (S.D. Cal.)
On June 3, 2021 the Court entered a consent order in United States v. Nelson (S.D. Cal.). The complaint alleges that Larry Nelson, who has owned and managed several four-unit rental properties in the San Diego, California area, engaged in a pattern or practice of sexual harassment of and retaliation against female tenants from at least 2005 to the present. The consent order includes a permanent injunction against the harasser-defendant’s personal participation in property management; entry of a $580,000 judgment, $205,000 of which is immediately payable to the 13 identified aggrieved persons, $25,000 as a civil penalty, and $350,000 suspended in reliance on defendant’s certification of his inability to pay; agreement to vacate eviction and small claims actions against aggrieved persons; and other injunctive provisions.
United States v. Orchard Village, LLC, et al. (E.D. Mo.)
On February 28, 2022, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Orchard Village, LLC, et al. (E.D. Mo.). The complaint, filed on May 28, 2021, alleged that the defendants discriminated against the complainants on the basis of familial status by imposing overly restrictive policies on families with children, including prohibiting children under the age of 18 from accessing the computer room, on-site movie theater, fitness center, or pool at the apartment complex without being accompanied by an adult leaseholder. The complaint also alleges that the defendants interfered with the complainants’ fair housing rights by ejecting complainant’s 16-year-old daughter from those facilities and issuing complainants a lease violation notice and notice of eviction based in part on the daughter’s access of those amenities. Additional defendants include Orchard Village Knollhaven, LLC and Michelson Realty Company, LLC.
Among other relief, the consent order requires the defendants to pay $16,000 to the complainants and adopt new rules and policies regarding access to amenities at 24 residential rental properties that Defendants own, operate, and manage that comply with the Fair Housing Act. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
Thai Meditation Association of Alabama v. City of Mobile, Alabama (S.D. Ala.)
Thai Association of Alabama, et al. v. City of Mobile (S.D. Ala.): On May 7, 2021, the Division filed a Statement of Interest in Support of Neither Party in this RLUIPA case on remand from the Eleventh Circuit. The Division filed a brief and participated in oral argument in the appeal, arguing that the district court had applied the wrong standard for evaluating RLUIPA substantial burden claims. The Eleventh Circuit agreed and reversed and remanded for the district court to apply an approach modeled on the decisions of other circuits. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment on April 12, 2021. The Statement of Interest elaborates on the approaches of the other circuits in evaluating substantial burden, and explains the compelling interest test the court should apply if it finds a substantial burden.
United States v. Chicopee Housing Authority (D. Mass.)
On December 21, 2021, the United States filed an amended complaint in United States v. Chicopee Housing Authority and Monica Blazic (D. Mass.). The amended complaint alleges that the defendants discriminated against Housing Authority residents based on race, national origin, and disability in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Specifically, the amended complaint alleges that, since at least 2013, defendant Blazic, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, made discriminatory statements to and about Black and Hispanic tenants, including using racial slurs to describe current and potential residents, indicating a preference against having Black and Hispanic residents and demanding that Spanish-speaking residents speak English, which intimidated and threatened Black and Hispanic tenants. The amended complaint also alleges that residents with disabilities who requested reasonable accommodations, such as transfers to first-floor or elevator-accessible units, have waited for years, even though the Housing Authority could have accommodated them, in violation of the FHA. The amended complaint includes allegations that are considerably broader than those in the original complaint, which was filed on April 19, 2021. The case was originally referred to the Department of Justice after the Department of Housing and Urban Development received a complaint of disability discrimination, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Woodcock (W.D. Pa.)
On September 30, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Woodcock (W.D. Pa.). The complaint, which was filed on April 12, 2021, alleges that defendants Allen and Heidi Woodcock, who own and manage the subject property, discriminated on the basis of sex in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The complaint alleges that Defendant Allen Woodcock sexually harassed a female tenant while he was at the subject property to perform maintenance, and that Defendants retaliated by initiating eviction proceedings after she reported the harassment. The consent order permanently enjoins Allen Woodcock from directly or indirectly performing any property management responsibilities including performing or supervising repairs or maintenance, advertising, showing or renting dwelling units, and negotiating rent and security deposits, and requires Defendants to pay $13,000 to the female tenant and forgive any outstanding back rent or other amounts she purportedly owes. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. John J. Flatley d/b/a John J. Flatley Company and Luke Page (D. N.H.)
On December 27, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. John J. Flatley d/b/a John J. Flatley Company, et al. (E.D. Tenn.). The complaint, filed on April 9, 2021, alleged that the defendants discriminated on the basis of disability when they refused to make a reasonable accommodation to allow the complainant to live with her emotional assistance Saint Bernard dog. The consent order requires the defendants to pay $35,000 in damages to the HUD complainants, adopt and implement a new reasonable accommodation policy for assistance animals, and obtain fair housing training. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
Press Release (12/27/2021)