On July 19, 2010, the United States Department of Justice filed a lawsuit under the Fair Housing Act of 1988, §42 U.S.C. §§3601-3631 against the owner and manager of a four-unit apartment building in Monroe, New Hampshire. The plaintiff brought the suit in the U.S. District Court for the ...
read more >
On July 19, 2010, the United States Department of Justice filed a lawsuit under the Fair Housing Act of 1988, §42 U.S.C. §§3601-3631 against the owner and manager of a four-unit apartment building in Monroe, New Hampshire. The plaintiff brought the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, on behalf of a mixed-national origin and race family, claiming the Defendant engaged in discriminatory housing practices. The complaint sets out allegations involving ethnic slurs and other bad treatment of the complainant family, including incidents that led to the arrest of the landlord and state court orders against him. The U.S. sought to enjoin further discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin and asked for compensatory and punitive damages to the complainants. The complainants intervened in the suit a few months later.
On April 7, 2011, the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire (Judge Landya McCafferty) approved a consent decree. The decree enjoined the defendant and its employees from making statements with respect to the rental of a dwelling that indicated a preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, or national origin; or coercing, threatening, intimidating, or interfering with any tenant's exercised or enjoyed rights. The defendant was required to get tenants' permission prior to entering units, except to make emergency repairs. In addition, the defendant agreed to undertake fair housing training of all employees, and a set of recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Finally, the defendant agreed to pay the complainants $15,000 in compensatory damages. The consent order was set to last two years, unless the defendant retained any direct or indirect ownership, management, or other financial interest in any residential rental property, in which case the consent order was to remain in effect for three years.
The consent decree terminated without any further litigation, and the case is now closed.
- 10/17/2012
- 12/01/2018
compress summary
