You are looking at posts that were written in the month of September in the year 2010.
|« Jul||Oct »|
Posted on September 28th, 2010 by Joseph William Singer.
Categories: Fair Housing Act.
South Middlesex Opportunity Council, Inc. v. Town of Framingham, 2010 WL 3607481 (D. Mass. 2010).
In this case, Judge Douglas Woodlock allowed a suit to proceed against a town and individual members of the town meeting, the board of selectmen and the town planning board in both their individual and official capacities alleging that defendants violated the Fair Housing Act by blocking plaintiff non-profit organizations from obtaining necessary approvals to establish housing to provide residential treatment and support to homeless and at-risk families, some of which were undergoing substance abuse rehabilitation and some of which may have had criminal histories. The court found that the town had repeatedly delayed in issuing permits and created other procedural hurdles and that evidence supported the allegation that the town did so for discriminatory reasons. The court found evidence of discriminatory statements by individual defendants and evidence of disparate treatment of similarly situated projects by the town. The court found sufficient evidence that could justify a finding that the town interfered with the plaintiff’s housing project in violation of §3617 of the Fair Housing Act. Finally, the court found that the defendants’ proffered justifications for their conduct were sufficient to send the question to the jury of whether the town had legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions but that the town’s evidence was not sufficient to conclude decisively that the town acted for nondiscriminatory reasons. The court found some of the proffered justifications to be illegitimate and others to be pretextual.
Following the summary judgment denial, the town settled with the plaintiffs for $1 million, although refusing to acknowledge any wrongdoing. Read article.