Lachira v. Sutton

2007 WL 1346913 (2007)

From our private database of 47,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Lachira v. Sutton

United States District Court for the District of Connecticut
2007 WL 1346913 (2007)

Darius Dehghan headshot
  • Written by Darius Dehghan, JD

Facts

Minerva Lachira (plaintiff), a Hispanic woman, lived in an apartment with her son. The apartment was owned by Stanford Sutton (defendant) and was managed by Stanford’s son, James Sutton (defendant). James told Lachira that “it has been a mistake to rent to you with a child.” James also referred to Lachira and her son as “stupid Spanish people.” Lachira brought suit, contending that the Suttons violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The Suttons filed a motion for summary judgment. The district court took the motion under advisement.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Dorsey, 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 949,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 949,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,400 briefs, keyed to 1,004 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.
  • AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 949,000 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
  • 47,400 briefs - keyed to 1,004 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

Casebooks

Housing Law

Key Terms

Understand your casebook readings in seconds

Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.

Get instant access to over 47,400+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,004 law school casebooks.

Case book preview
Start your free 7-day trial