Fair Housing Justice Center v. Edgewater Park Owners Cooperative

2012 WL 762323 (2012)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Fair Housing Justice Center v. Edgewater Park Owners Cooperative

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2012 WL 762323 (2012)

Facts

A housing development called Edgewater Park was governed by the Edgewater Park Owners Cooperative, Inc. (cooperative) (defendant). The cooperative had a policy requiring prospective buyers to obtain three references from current residents. However, the cooperative did not provide coherent standards for implementing the policy. For instance, it was unclear how long a resident was required to live at Edgewater Park before becoming eligible to serve as a reference. It was also unclear whether a resident providing a reference was required to know the prospective buyer for a certain period of time. Additionally, the cooperative did not directly accept applications from prospective buyers. Thus, owners in Edgewater Park sold their properties through real estate agents. The real estate agents informed prospective buyers about the cooperative’s policy. The Fair Housing Justice Center, Inc. (center) (plaintiff) was an organization that hired testers of different races to pose as prospective buyers. The center sent Black and White testers to Amelia Lewis, a real estate agent who showed properties in Edgewater Park. Lewis told the White tester that the policy was not a barrier and that she would help the tester satisfy the policy. By contrast, Lewis told the Black testers that she could not help them satisfy the policy, and she refused to show the testers any properties in Edgewater Park. Subsequently, the center brought suit, contending that the cooperative’s policy violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The cooperative filed a motion for summary judgment, which the district court took under advisement.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Patterson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 816,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership