Fair Housing & Discrimination based on Family Status

[BoredAtty]

What is the name of your state? MD with Federal Issue

I'm looking for federal or state (doesn't matter which state) case law which provides that a tenant cannot be evicted due to his/her noisy baby (i.e. normal crying, etc.).

I believe it is a violation of federal and (most) state's fair housing laws (see 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a)), but some case law backing that position would be nice. I'm fairly new to FHA law, so I'm basically researching it for the first time.

Thx for any help,

BA

 

[Hot Topic]

A landlord is violating Federal law if their sole decision not to rent to an individual or couple is based on the fact that the individual or couple has a child or children.

It's stressful to live in a building with little or no soundproofing in close proximity to an apartment that contains a constantly crying baby. There are tenants who may wonder if the constant crying is the result of neglect, perhaps even abuse.

It's normal for children to shout and run. Just because it's normal doesn't mean, however, that tenants disturbed by it have to accept it without comment.

 

[Cvillecpm]

Your landlord holding you responsible for your misbehaving children or crying baby is not discriminatory.

Your lack of action and acceptance of responsibility for your child crying does not allow you to use the fair housing complaint process to cover your parental duties.

If your child has symptons of cronic crying, you may well need to have it seen by a doctor or your neighbors may be required to report you to CPS.

 

[Just Blue]

What is the name of your state? MD with Federal Issue

I'm looking for federal or state (doesn't matter which state) case law which provides that a tenant cannot be evicted due to his/her noisy baby (i.e. normal crying, etc.).

I believe it is a violation of federal and (most) state's fair housing laws (see 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a)), but some case law backing that position would be nice. I'm fairly new to FHA law, so I'm basically researching it for the first time.

Thx for any help,

BA

Define "normal crying".
How old is the child?

 

[BoredAtty]

Oh brother. I should have known not to bother...

 

[Hot Topic]

I was once kept awake all night by a crying baby. The mother came to my apartment the next day. Right off the bat, she expressed hope that I didn't think she was abusing her baby.

I'm wondering if there isn't more than just the "normal" crying of a "noisy" baby involved.

 

[BoredAtty]

Wow...I can see why some OP's become frustrated with the responses in here. I am not looking for a glib analysis of assumed facts from the peanut gallery.

Instead, I'm looking for case law like the following (I found this case after starting this thread):

"[...] a New York court dismissed a landlord's holdover petition brought on the grounds that the tenants were objectionable under a lease clause prohibiting disturbing noises (to tenant below), which were made by the tenants' two (2) small children, aged 2 and 4, because the noise of the children's ordinary activities was not excessive or deliberate, considering children are inherently louder than adults." Louisiana Leasing Co. v. Sokolow, 48 Misc.2d 1014, 266 N.Y.S.2d 447 (Civ.Ct. Queens Co.1966).

That's a useful case, except that it's old and was written prior to the 1988 amendment of the FHA which prohibits discrimination based on familial status.

If you don't have a clue, please feel free to ignore this thread...seriously.

 

[ecmst12]

Most people who post here are not lawyers looking for help with their research, they are people with problems looking for advice about their specific situation.

 

[CA LL]

The case laws you will find in just about any state would be similar to the one noted.

The burden of proof is to somehow prove that the noise caused by "whatever" is extremely excessive due to a CURABLE issue. Most courts will find in favor of the "family" with a child due to familial status protection because children/babies are NORMALLY noisy.

If however one were to be able to prove the crying was excessive due to a CURABLE cause such as leaving a baby alone in the unit (or unsupervised children) and/or abuse, getting child protective services involved might help it go the other way but it's a very touchy issue.

During summer...these type of complaints seem to pop up more than usual due to folks having windows open and being outside more.

I personally would not want to "touch" trying to evict due to noise due to crying baby in my state/courts.

BUT...if a LL uses MTM rental agreements...and they've NOT said anything to the family with the crying baby, they may wish to consider terminating the agreement for NO REASON as allowed except in rent/eviction controlled areas to try and RETAIN the rest of the good tenants who are complaining that their right to quiet use and enjoyment is being breached.

This is another benefit of using MTM to terminate those in "gray" areas or that to try and use the "real" reason would get you in a load of trouble. LL's just need to be careful they don't cite a reason of any sort before terminating..if they do it can come back to haunt them when they DO terminate as then that "reason" becomes the implied "for cause" even though none is needed.

A LL must manage their business doing what's best for the greatest number of tenants and themselves. They must also not break any laws. Terminating a MTM rental agreement except in eviction controlled areas for NO CAUSE is not breaking the law. Still..I'd be careful about it.

Your post indicated you were looking for FEDERAL case law. Protected classes are not only FEDERAL but additional protected classes exist at STATE levels and even LOCAL levels so it's best to look for case law in your OWN state at a minimum OR a case that was appealed all the way up to the FEDERAL court level.

Most I've seen on this subject..as long as the parents do what they can to try and contain the noise the court would side with the family. That being said a LL who has a fixed term lease instead of MTM with a tenant might wish to offer one or the other party the opportunity to move into a different unit to satisfy specific complaint.

 

[seniorjudge]

Wow...I can see why some OP's become frustrated with the responses in here. I am not looking for a glib analysis of assumed facts from the peanut gallery.

Instead, I'm looking for case law like the following (I found this case after starting this thread):

"[...] a New York court dismissed a landlord's holdover petition brought on the grounds that the tenants were objectionable under a lease clause prohibiting disturbing noises (to tenant below), which were made by the tenants' two (2) small children, aged 2 and 4, because the noise of the children's ordinary activities was not excessive or deliberate, considering children are inherently louder than adults." Louisiana Leasing Co. v. Sokolow, 48 Misc.2d 1014, 266 N.Y.S.2d 447 (Civ.Ct. Queens Co.1966).

That's a useful case, except that it's old and was written prior to the 1988 amendment of the FHA which prohibits discrimination based on familial status.

If you don't have a clue, please feel free to ignore this thread...seriously.

Colonial Court Apartments, Inc. v. Kern, 163 N.W.2d 770, 282 Minn. 533 (Minn., 1968)

This is a really old case that says that tenants (even pregnant ones!) can be evicted period for being too noisy. In fact, the landlord's failure to do enough was constructive eviction on the part of another (not noisy) tenant.

Shepardize it and see what happened.

 

[BoredAtty]

The case laws you will find in just about any state would be similar to the one noted.

The burden of proof is to somehow prove that the noise caused by "whatever" is extremely excessive due to a CURABLE issue. Most courts will find in favor of the "family" with a child due to familial status protection because children/babies are NORMALLY noisy.

If however one were to be able to prove the crying was excessive due to a CURABLE cause such as leaving a baby alone in the unit (or unsupervised children) and/or abuse, getting child protective services involved might help it go the other way but it's a very touchy issue.

During summer...these type of complaints seem to pop up more than usual due to folks having windows open and being outside more.

I personally would not want to "touch" trying to evict due to noise due to crying baby in my state/courts.

BUT...if a LL uses MTM rental agreements...and they've NOT said anything to the family with the crying baby, they may wish to consider terminating the agreement for NO REASON as allowed except in rent/eviction controlled areas to try and RETAIN the rest of the good tenants who are complaining that their right to quiet use and enjoyment is being breached.

This is another benefit of using MTM to terminate those in "gray" areas or that to try and use the "real" reason would get you in a load of trouble. LL's just need to be careful they don't cite a reason of any sort before terminating..if they do it can come back to haunt them when they DO terminate as then that "reason" becomes the implied "for cause" even though none is needed.

A LL must manage their business doing what's best for the greatest number of tenants and themselves. They must also not break any laws. Terminating a MTM rental agreement except in eviction controlled areas for NO CAUSE is not breaking the law. Still..I'd be careful about it.

Your post indicated you were looking for FEDERAL case law. Protected classes are not only FEDERAL but additional protected classes exist at STATE levels and even LOCAL levels so it's best to look for case law in your OWN state at a minimum OR a case that was appealed all the way up to the FEDERAL court level.

Most I've seen on this subject..as long as the parents do what they can to try and contain the noise the court would side with the family. That being said a LL who has a fixed term lease instead of MTM with a tenant might wish to offer one or the other party the opportunity to move into a different unit to satisfy specific complaint.

Wow, insightful post. I appreciate you confirming what I had suspected. I'll keep digging for a case on point. Thx.

 

[BoredAtty]

Colonial Court Apartments, Inc. v. Kern, 163 N.W.2d 770, 282 Minn. 533 (Minn., 1968)

This is a really old case that says that tenants (even pregnant ones!) can be evicted period for being too noisy. In fact, the landlord's failure to do enough was constructive eviction on the part of another (not noisy) tenant.

Shepardize it and see what happened.

It's probably not going to be on point. If they evicted a pregnant woman due to noise, then clearly they didn't discriminate based upon her family status (fetuses aren't generally noisy). Also, it was prior to the 1988 amendment which banned discrimination based on having children. I'll check it out, though. Thx.

 

[BL]

http://www.homelinemn.org/downloads/May02-Noisy_Neighbor.pdf

Note this is state specific , but in one case the court found that a screaming or crying baby at odd hrs. was not sufficient .

One were two children playing were not sufficient .

 

[Cvillecpm]

the problem you have is that when cases are "resolved" the records are not available.

Local VA PM filed an eviction against a family in F'burg area after the HOA started fining the property/unit owner for the actions of the tenants' children that were evidenced in numerous police reports.

Family filed a FH complaint and beaucoup bucks were spent to investigate and PM's insurance got involved....after dust settled, there was a finding of "no case", the eviction when through and now the residents have an EVICTION against them AND the landlord can advise future landlords that they filed a FH complaint...no gag order in this instance...

You won't find this case in any caselaw since it was a "no finding" to support the complaint.

Check with Tony Baize on the fairhousing.com website. He keeps up with this topic. Otherwise, check with legalmomentum.org as they deal with family and domestic issues.

 

[OHlandlord]

Forgive me for asking, but have you been hired by someone in this type of case? Then it isn't it YOUR job (for which you are being paid) to find this case law? Shouldn't you be researching federal and state cases to find applicable case law to help prevent an eviction of your client? Personally, I wouldn't have much confidence in an attorney who turns to a web site for free landlord advice to find my legal defense. (Does your client know this how you are working to prepare his/her defense?) Don't take this personally, but that's my opinion. Maybe you could conference with a more experience colleage who has dealt with family law?

That said, I would never try to evict a family who has a normal crying baby. That's what babies do, how they communicate. Even if it cried more often than usual, perhaps the child has colic or an ear infection. I wouldn't be trying to evict. Now if the child was a toddler or older, crying like this wouldn't be normal. But in a baby, they'll outgrow it soon enough.