Appellate Department, Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California
184 Cal. Rptr. 161 (App. Dep’t Super. Ct. 1982)
William Hubert and Cindy Kelly (plaintiffs) entered a contract for Kelly to work as Hubert’s 24-hour attendant. Hubert is a quadriplegic who rented an apartment from Williams (defendant). Kelly is homosexual. Williams later evicted Hubert from the apartment. Hubert and Kelly filed suit under the Unruh Civil Rights Act, claiming that Williams had evicted Hubert because Kelly was homosexual and Hubert had associated with a homosexual. The trial court granted Williams’ motion to dismiss, holding that the Unruh Civil Rights Act did not prohibit housing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Hubert and Kelly appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Bernstein, J.)
What to do next…
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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 201,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.