Alan Haehner, et al. v. Robert Dufresne, Capture LLC, Northwestern Mutual, et al.
Mar 09, 2011OUTCOME: Settled before trial
Represented real estate investors pursuing security fraud claims.
John R. Shoemaker's Legal Cases (23)
Bloomington, MN
Lawsuits and disputes Lawyer at Bloomington, MN
Practice Areas: Lawsuits & Disputes, Litigation ... +3 more
Gallagher, Steinhauser and Harrial, et al. v. Magner, City of Saint Paul, et al.
Sep 01, 2010OUTCOME: The United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court, remanded for jury trial; On appeal, U.S. Supreme Court increased the standard of proof; in 2017, Plaintiffs withdrew their claims.
Multiple owners of low-income rental housing brought federal fair housing claims against City of St. Paul and city officials challenging illegally elevated housing code requirements and enforcement as ... having a disparate impact on minority tenant families by displacement of tenant families and reduction of safe, decent and sanitary rental housing for "protected class" members. The first of three cases, eventually consolidated in federal court, was filed in 2004 by attorney John R. Shoemaker representing low-income rental housing providers Frank Steinhauser, Mark Meysembourg and Kelly Brisson against the City. A second case was filed by John Shoemaker on behalf of three additional housing providers in 2005: Sandra Harrilal; Steven Johnson; and Bee and Lamena Vue. A third lawsuit was filed by Attorney Matthew Engel on behalf of Thomas Gallagher, Joe Collins and others in 2005. These three cases were consolidated in federal court, and eventually became famously known as the "Magner v. Gallagher" case before the U.S. Supreme Court during 2011 and 2012. A large majority of the 150 rental units owned by these plaintiffs were occupied by people of color and in many instances by Black families and these units were targeted by the City. The consolidated lawsuits were brought under the federal Fair Housing Act alleging the City's discrimination based upon race and challenged the City's "code-to-the-max, forced sale" housing code enforcement tactics as illegal under state and federal law. The City had implemented unlawful requirements for rental housing - higher than permitted under the controlling State Building Code. The City's heavy-handed code enforcement targeted minority-occupied rental dwellings with displacement of residents through administrative condemnations, unnecessary but demanded improvements to the properties, and court proceedings drastically increasing the costs, fees and other expenses of the low-income housing providers, effectively bleeding-out owners' financial resources to the point of forcing sale and dislocation of renters. The local federal court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in September 2010, reversed the dismissal finding the housing providers had provided sufficient evidence to merit a trial. The court found significant plaintiffs' proof the City had an alternative, effective policy that lessened disparate impact on protected class residents - yet the City abandoned the effective policy for an illegal "code-to-the-max" housing policy. The City pursued appeal of the Eighth Circuit's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court and following five conferences by the high court on the City's petition, the court finally granted the petition. Shortly before oral arguments at the Supreme Court, the City withdrew its appeal amid intense pressure from vested interests in preserving the "disparate impact" theory threatened by the City's appeal before a conservative court. Pioneer Press, September 1, 2010: https://www.twincities.com/2010/09/01/st-paul-housing-code-lawsuits-are-given-new-life/. United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals' opinion: https://casetext.com/case/gallagher-v-magner#p839;
Bee Vue, et al. v. City of Saint Paul
Apr 13, 2010OUTCOME: The Minnesota Court of Appeals overturned the City of Saint Paul's decision to demolish the building and Vue was then able to provide affordable rental housing to people in need in the community.
Represented developer and rental property owner in challenge to City's order for removal - teardown - of a six bedroom, affordable rental housing building where City's basis was not supported by the ev ... idence and was arbitrary and oppressive.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
