Case: 5:10-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 1 of 8. PageID #: 1

Similar documents
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff, United States v. Donald Sterling, et al. (C.D. Cal.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:13-cv JG-JMA Document 1 Filed 04/29/13 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 1

FILED 16 AUG 09 PM 2:59

FILED 16 AUG 29 PM 2:30

FILED 16 NOV 03 PM 2:13

Case 0:12-cv RSR Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2012 Page 1 of 15

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Fwd: CF Public Comment

Case: 5:09-cv DDD Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/04/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.

Complaint, Joly v. Town of Lake Hunting and Fishing Club Inc, Docket Nos. 2:05-cv-02223, 2:06-cv (Central District of Illinois 2006)

7 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PIERCE 8 STATE OF WASHINGTON, 9 Plaintiff,

Complaint, Kristofek v. Richard Yanz, et al, Docket No. 1:12-cv (Northern District of Illinois Oct 17, 2012)

Case: 1:06-cv JRA Doc #: 28 Filed: 05/08/09 1 of 9. PageID #: 220

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION

Case: 4:18-cv JG Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/09/18 1 of 8. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

Case 1:18-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 11/28/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Amended Complaint, Gassman v. Frischholtz et al, Docket No. 1:05-cv (Northern District of Illinois 2005)

Case: 3:12-cv JZ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/21/12 1 of 7. PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Case: 4:15-cv BYP Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/11/15 1 of 18. PageID #: 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WALLA WALLA. Plaintiff, Defendant. I. INTRODUCTION

Case: 1:11-cv DAP Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/19/11 1 of 9. PageID #: 1

Case: 5:14-cv JRA Doc #: 19 Filed: 11/06/14 1 of 8. PageID #: 221

Case 7:17-cv Document 1 Filed 05/14/17 Page 1 of 11

Case: 1:17-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/15/17 1 of 12. PageID #: 1

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 11/01/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1

Case: 2:10-cv GLF-NMK Doc #: 1 Filed: 12/06/10 Page: 1 of 8 PAGEID #: 1

Form 61 Fair Housing Ordinance

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/30/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1. No.: Defendants.

Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/19/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

Case 5:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 19. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS San Antonio Division

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

1. The Plaintiff, Richard N. Bell, took photograph of the Indianapolis Skyline in

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SENATE FILE NO. SF0132. Sponsored by: Senator(s) Scott and Representative(s) Stubson and Walters A BILL. for

Case 3:11-cv CRW-TJS Document 1 Filed 04/06/11 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:99-mc Document 417 Filed 05/23/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case: 1:17-cv MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/14/17 Page: 1 of 24 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Case: 5:15-cv SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/20/15 2 of 9. PageID #: 2

Case: 3:14-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 12/31/14 1 of 18. PageID #: 1

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 5:09-cv SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/14/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Case 3:12-cv M Document 6 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 18

Second Amended Complaint, Gassman v. Frischholtz et al, Docket No. 1:05-cv (Northern District of Illinois 2005)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case 3:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/30/19 Page 1 of 17

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO

Case 3:17-cv M Document 1 Filed 07/26/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF OHIO EASTERN DISTRICT

Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Hon.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case: 3:18-cv TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 4 PAGEID #: 1

Case: 1:17-cv DCN Doc #: 14 Filed: 03/02/17 1 of 19. PageID #: 69

Case5:11-cv EJD Document28 Filed09/09/11 Page1 of 10

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Case 4:15-cv RLY-DML Document 1 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 1:08-cv Document 1 Filed 10/07/2008 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case: 2:17-cv MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/23/17 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 1

Case 1:13-cv LEK-KSC Document 1 Filed 12/18/13 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:10-cv RAJ Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 8

NATURE OF THE ACTION. This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236 COMPLAINT

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 04/30/18 Page 1 of 16

FILED SAN MAteO COUNTY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION

COMPLAINT. Plaintiff, The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC ( Green Pet Shop or. Plaintiff ), by and through its attorneys, THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR SARASOTA, MANATEE, DESOTO COUNTY, FLORIDA

Case 1:18-cv JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 06/11/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 1:11-cv NLH-KMW Document 19 Filed 06/01/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 196 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/16/ :02 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/16/2017

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/29/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT. Plaintiff United States of America (the "United States") alleges upon information INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 8:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:1

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/09/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

Case: 1:16-cv WOB Doc #: 4 Filed: 06/03/16 Page: 1 of 12 PAGEID #: 15

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 1-2 Filed: 06/03/09 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case 3:04-cv JSW Document 168 Filed 10/20/2005 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand

Case 3:16-cv GMG Document 1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1

Case: 1:14-cv SO Doc #: 50 Filed: 07/15/15 1 of 7. PageID #: 438 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:11-cv LPS Document 14 Filed 01/30/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 59 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Transcription:

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 1 of 8. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Case No. TESTA FAMILY ENTERPRISES, LTD., LLC d/b/a ROYAL ARMS APARTMENTS c/o AMERICO TESTA, REGISTERED AGENT 6442 PECK ROAD RAVENNA, OH 44266 and CHRISTINE TESTA COMPLAINT 18 LA SALLE COURT, SE NORTH CANTON, OH 44709, Defendants. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce th~ provisions of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3631. It is brought on behalf of Megan Wenk and her minor children, and the Fair Housing Advocates Association (collectively, "Complainants".

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 2 of 8. PageID #: 2 2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1345, and 42 U.S.C. 3612(0 and 3614(a. 3. Venue is proper in the Northern District of Ohio under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b and 42 U.S.c. 3612(0, in that the events or omissions giving rise to this action occurred in this district. PARTIES 4. Plaintiff is the United States of America. The United States brings this action on behalf of the complainants as follows: a. Complainant Megan Wenk ("Wenk" is a resident of the Northern District of Ohio. She has two minor children who, at the time relevant to this matter, were ten months old and four years old. Wenk and her minor children are "aggrieved persons" as defined by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3602(1. b. Complainant The Fair Housing Advocates Association ("FHAA" is an Ohio non- profit corporation, with its principal place of business at 520 South Main Street, Akron, Ohio.. FHAA is an "aggrieved person" as defined by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3602(1. 5. At all times relevant to the complaint, Defendant Testa Family Enterprises ("TFE" was the owner of a 26-unit apartment building known as Royal Arms Apartments ("Royal Arms", located at 145 Van Buren Street, Ravenna, Ohio. Royal Arms is a dwelling within the meaning of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3602(b. 6. At all times relevant to the complaint, Defendant Christine Testa ("Testa" was the manager of the Royal Arms Apartments. 2

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 3 of 8. PageID #: 3 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 7. In July 2009, Wenk was looking for an apartment to rent. She wished to find new housing because her current home was overcrowded and was infested with black mold. On July 23,2009, Wenk responded to a newspaper advertisement listing a two-bedroom unit available at Royal Arms. Wenk called the telephone number in the advertisement and spoke to Testa. 8. Testa asked Wenk whether she had children, and how old they were. When Wenk told her she had a ten-month-old and a four-year-old, Testa informed Wenk that Royal Arms did not rent to people with small children. 9. After Defendant Testa refused to show Wenk the available unit at Royal Arms, it took Wenk approximately three months to find housing, during which she and her children were forced to remain in crowded and unhealthy housing. The apartment she found was in a less safe and less convenient neighborhood than Royal Arms. 10. On July 23,2009, Wenk contacted FHAA to report her interaction with Testa. As a result of this report, FHAA developed and conducted testing to determine whether the Defendants discriminated against potential renters based on familial status. 11. During a test conducted by FHAA on July 24, 2009, a tester posing as a man with children ages six and eight, spoke to Defendant Testa about renting an apartment at the Royal Arms Apartments. She told him that a parent with children of those ages was an acceptable tenant, but that she would not rent to persons with younger children because she felt the property was not "conducive" for them due to the design of the building. 12. During a second test conducted by FHAA on July 24,2009, Defendant Testa made comments to the tester posing as a father of children ages two and three meant to 3

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 4 of 8. PageID #: 4 discourage him from renting her property. Among other comments, Defendant Testa said that the children would be "a problem" and that she had "no young children" living at the Royal Arms Apartments. She told him she could not show him the available apartment. 13. During a third test conducted by FHAA on July 24, 2009, Defendant Testa made comments to the tester posing as a father of children ages ten months and two years meant to discourage him from renting her property. She told him she could not show him the available apartment, because the property was not "conducive" to children under 12, because of open walkways with wrought iron railings. 14. During an investigation conducted by HUD, Defendants acknowledged acknowled.ged that it was their practice not to rent units above the ground level to families with young children.. 15. Defendant Testa admitted that she had had conversations with parents of young children in which she "always communicated" safety concerns about the building, and that after these conversations, these potential tenants often changed their minds about renting at Royal Arms. She stated that it was "more likely than not" that she did not express safety concerns to potential tenants without children. 16. Defendant Testa admitted that she had refused to rent an above-ground apartment to another woman who had a five-year-old child, and forced this woman to wait until a ground floor unit became available. 17.. On or about August 24, 2009, FHAA and Wenk filed complaints of discrimination (HUD Form 903 with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD alleging that the Defendants had discriminated on the basis of familial status in violation of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 3601, et seq. 4

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 5 of 8. PageID #: 5 18. Pursuant to the requirements of42 U.S.C. 3610(a and (b, the Secretary of HUD conducted an investigation of the complaint, attempted conciliation without success, and prepared a final investigative report. Based on the information gathered in this investigation, the Secretary, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3610(g(I, determined that reasonable cause existed to believe that Defendants had committed illegal discriminatory housing practices in connection with the subject property.. Therefore, on August 19,2010, the Secretary issued a Determination of Reasonable Cause and Charge of Discrimination, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 361O(g(2(A, charging that the Defendant had engaged in discriminatory practices, in violation of the Fair Housing Act. 19.. On September 9,2010, complainant FHAA timely elected to have the charge resolved in a federal civil action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3612(a. 20. The Secretary subsequently authorized the Attorney General to file this action on behalf of the Complainants, pursuant to 42 U.S.c. 3612(0. COUNT I (Discrimination on the Basis of Familial Status 21. By the actions and statements set forth above, Defendants have: a. Refused to negotiate for the rental of, or otherwise made unavailable or denied dwellings to persons because of familial status, in violation of Section 804(a of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.. 3604(a; and b.. Discriminated against persons in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental of dwellings because of familial status, in violation of Section 804(b of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3604(b; 5

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 6 of 8. PageID #: 6 c. Made statements with respect to the rental of dwellings that indicate a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on familial status, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination, in violation of Section 804( c of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3604(c. 22. As a result of the conduct or actions of the Defendants, Complainants FHAA and Wenk and her minor children have suffered damages and are aggrieved persons within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 3602(1. 23. The Defendants' discriminatory actions and statements as set forth above were intentional, willful, and taken in disregard for the rights of Complainants. constitutes: COUNT II (Pattern or Practice of Discrimination 24. The Defendants' discrimination on the basis of familial status, as described above, a. A pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of rights granted by the Fair Housing Act, in violation of 42 U.S.C. 3614(a; and/or b. A denial to a group of persons of rights granted by the Fair Housing Act, which raises an issue of general public importance, in violation of42 U.S.C. 3614(a. 25. In addition to Complainants, there may be other victims of Defendants' discriminatory actions and practices who are "aggrieved persons" as defined in 42 U.S.C. 3602(1. These persons may have suffered damages as a result of Defendants' discriminatory conduct. 26. Defendants' actions and statements described in the preceding paragraphs were intentional, willful, and taken in disregard for the rights of others. 6

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 7 of 8. PageID #: 7 REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the United States requests that the Court enter an order that: A. Declares that Defendants' discriminatory policies and practices, as set forth above, violate the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.; B. Enjoins Defendants, their agents, employees, successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with any of them from discriminating on the basis of familial status, in violation of the Fair Housing Act; C. A wards monetary damages to Megan Wenk and her two minor children and the Fair Housing Advocates Association, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3612(0(3 and 3614(d(l(B, and each other person injured by Defendants' conduct, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3614(d(l(B; D. Assesses civil penalties against Defendants in the amounts authorized by 42 U.S.C. 3614(d(1(C, 3614(d(l(C, to vindicate the public interest. require. The United States further prays for such additional relief as the interests of justice may 7

Case: 5:10-cv-02319 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 8 of 8. PageID #: 8 Assistant Attorney General STEVEN H. ROSENBAUM Chief ELIZABETH A. SINGER Director, U.S. Attorneys' Fair Housing Program Housing and Civil Enforcement Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice STEVEN M. DE ELBACH UNITED STATES ATTORNEY simi chelle L. Heyer Michelle L. Heyer (0065723 Assistant U.S. Attorney United States Courthouse 801 West Superior Avenue Suite 400 Cleveland, OH 44113 216-622-3686 FAX 216-522-2404 michelle.heyer@usdoj.gov Attorneys for the United States of America 8