Robbins v. American Preferred Management Co., Inc., et al.
N/AOUTCOME: Summary Judgment for Client
Plaintiffs asserted federal and state sex and disability discrimination claims, a retaliation claim, and negligence against various defendants, relating to their tenancy in subsidized apartments for th ... e elderly and disabled. They claimed that a 67-year old maintenance man sexually harassed them and that they were evicted after obtaining ex parte personal protection orders. Specifically they alleged that he made inappropriate comments, peered into windows, stole underwear, and improperly entered their apartments. They also claimed that Defendants failed to accommodate certain disabilities. Defendants argued in response that (1) FHA claims were untimely, and (2) plaintiffs failed to state prima facie cases of discrimination and retaliation. The allegations of harassment, even if true, did not create a pervasively hostile environment. Also, one plaintiff did not require an accommodation, while the other was not disabled. Finally, there was no retaliation because the plaintiffs agreed to leave their apartments. The Court ruled that plaintiffs' claims for disability discrimination failed. There was no proof that plaintiffs were disabled or regarded as disabled. The Court next ruled that plaintiffs' sex discrimiation claims failed because there was no proof that they were subjected to unwelcome sexual conduct or communication. The retaliation claim and negligence claims also failed.
