Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Cisneros
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
52 F.3d 1351 (1995)

- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (defendant) was responsible for administering the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Pursuant to the text of the FHA, racial discrimination was prohibited in the provision of services that affected an individual’s ability to purchase housing. Because mortgage lenders required borrowers to obtain property insurance on mortgaged property, HUD enacted a regulation that interpreted the FHA to prohibit racial discrimination in property-insurance services. HUD received complaints from various individuals that Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (Nationwide) (plaintiff) engaged in racial discrimination in its property-insurance services. Relying on the regulation, HUD began investigating these complaints. Nationwide filed suit against HUD, contending that the regulation was invalid. The district court granted summary judgment to HUD. Nationwide appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Milburn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.