Rehabilitation Support Services v. City of Albany
United States District Court for the Northern District of New York
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86081 (2015)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
Rehabilitation Support Services, Inc. (RSS) (plaintiff) sought to establish a residence for 24 individuals recovering from alcohol and substance abuse in the city of Albany. The proposed site for the residence was located in a residential zone according to the city’s zoning ordinance. The city’s ordinance only permitted single- and two-family residences and houses of worship. Certain other multi-unit residences, such as dormitories and nursing homes, could operate in the residential zone if they obtained a special-use permit. Other multi-unit dwellings, like RSS, were required to obtain a use variance to operate in the residential zone. To obtain a use variance, an applicant was required to show that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions caused unnecessary hardship. There was no such requirement to obtain a special-use permit. RSS applied for a use variance but was denied by the city’s zoning board of appeals. RSS filed suit in district court and alleged that the city’s zoning ordinance violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because the city’s ordinance placed a stricter standard on community residences for people with disabilities than other residences and facilities.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kahn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 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.