Fair Housing Act Does Not Impose an Ongoing Duty on Subsequent Owners to Remedy a Builder or Designer's Noncompliance

Harding v. Orlando Apartments, LLC, No. 13-11805, from MDFla

Per curiam opinion joined by Judge Hull, Senior Judge Black, and District Judge Walter (WDLa).

Summary: The plaintiff brought claims under the Fair Housing Act alleging that an apartment complex discriminated against people with handicaps in violation of 42 U.S.C. §3604(f)(1)-(2).  The panel found that the FHA’s design and construction guidelines do not provide a standard for determining whether discrimination under subsections (f)(1) and (f)(2) exists outside of the design and construction contexts.  In other words, the FHA does not imposing an ongoing duty on subsequent owners of property to remedy noncompliant designs made by a builder/designer.  The plaintiff thus could not state a claim under the FHA against the owner of the apartment complex, who did not design or build the complex.  The district court’s grant of summary judgment to the apartment complex is affirmed (albeit on different grounds).