• NY Apartment Law
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
  • Commercial Lease Law
  • Guidebooks
  • Archives
  • Main Articles
  • Departments
  • eAlerts
  • Blogs
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • NY Apartment Law
  • New York Apartment Law Insider
  • New York Landlord V. Tenant
  • Co-Op & Condo Case Law Digest
  • New York Rent Regulation Checklist, Fourth Edition
  • 2025 New York City Apartment Management Checklist
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
  • Fair Housing Coach
  • Assisted Housing Management Insider
  • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
  • Fair Housing Boot Camp. Basic Training For New Hires
  • Commercial Lease Law
  • Commercial Lease Law Insider
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses: Tenant's Edition
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
  • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
  • Main Articles
  • Features
  • Certification
  • Compliance
  • Crime & Security
  • Dealing with Households
  • Income Calculations
  • Maintenance
  • Screening Applicants
  • Departments
  • Dos and Don'ts
  • Q and A
  • Recent Court Rulings
  • HUD Audits
  • In the News
  • Ask the Insider
  • Ask the Insider
  • Send Us A Question
May 19, 2025
We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
The Habitat Group Logo
  • NY Apartment Law
    • New York Apartment Law Insider
    • New York Landlord V. Tenant
    • Co-Op & Condo Case Law Digest
    • New York Rent Regulation Checklist, Fourth Edition
    • 2025 New York City Apartment Management Checklist
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
    • Fair Housing Coach
    • Assisted Housing Management Insider
    • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    • Fair Housing Boot Camp. Basic Training For New Hires
  • Commercial Lease Law
    • Commercial Lease Law Insider
    • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
      • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
    • Best Commercial Lease Clauses: Tenant's Edition
  • Guidebooks
  • May 19, 2025
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • May 19, 2025
AHMI Logo.webp
  • Archives
  • Main Articles
    • Features
    • Certification
    • Compliance
    • Crime & Security
    • Dealing with Households
    • Income Calculations
    • Maintenance
    • Screening Applicants
  • Departments
    • Dos and Don'ts
    • Q and A
    • Recent Court Rulings
    • HUD Audits
    • In the News
    • Ask the Insider
      • Send Us A Question
  • eAlerts
  • Blogs
Free Issue
The Habitat Group Logo
May 19, 2025
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
Home » Owner Not Liable for Retaliation, Time-Barred Alleged Discriminatory Acts

Owner Not Liable for Retaliation, Time-Barred Alleged Discriminatory Acts

May 18, 2017

Facts: A resident sued an owner for unlawful discrimination and retaliation in violation of the Fair Housing Act. The resident claimed that the property manager discriminated against her because she is a Jehovah’s Witness and retaliated against her after she filed religious discrimination complaints with HUD and the state’s Human Rights Commission.

With respect to her religious discrimination claim, the resident alleged that the manager prohibited Jehovah’s Witnesses from hosting religious or personal meetings in the main lobby, yard, or kitchen, while permitting tenants of other religious faiths to host such meetings; required tenants to attend “mandatory” political meetings, even though the Jehovah’s Witness faith prohibits participation in politics; gave preferential treatment in housing to non-Jehovah’s Witness tenants; and refused to allow the resident to leave religious information in the lobby, while allowing other non-Jehovah’s Witness tenants to leave their religious information in the lobby.

The resident claimed that she asked to hold a religious service in the main lobby in 2010 after a friend’s mother passed away, and the manager refused the request. In contrast, the resident alleged, other religious groups were permitted to hold Sunday service meetings and Bible study groups at the site on a regular basis. The resident also claimed that the manager stated over the intercom system that the resident should place her religious magazines “in the trash where they belong.”

In May 2014, according to the resident, the manager withheld documents relating to her application for annual recertification for a housing subsidy from HUD, and then failed to submit her application in a timely manner, causing her to lose her HUD subsidy. She claimed that after she lost her subsidy, the owner raised her rent to the full market rate, even though the manager knew that she could pay only 30 percent of the market rate for the apartment without the HUD subsidy.

In September 2014, HUD issued a Letter of Findings in response to the resident’s complaint alleging religious discrimination. In the letter, HUD stated that, following an investigation, it made a determination of no probable cause with respect to all of the allegations in her HUD complaint. She asked for a review, and HUD upheld the investigator’s findings. The owner asked the court for a judgment without a trial in its favor.

Ruling: A Pennsylvania district court granted the owner’s request with respect to the resident’s religious discrimination claim, to the extent it related to events that occurred prior to March 8, 2011, and the resident’s retaliation claim, to the extent it related to the owner’s failure to properly file the resident’s HUD recertification paperwork.

Reasoning: The Fair Housing Act has a two-year statute of limitations—that is, there’s a two-year period within which a person can bring a legal action against another party for violating the act. And the resident didn’t file her HUD complaint until March 8, 2013. Therefore, the resident was entitled to include claims in this action relating to events that occurred, at the earliest, on March 8, 2011.

As a result, the court ruled for the owner on the resident’s religious discrimination claim to the extent that claim was based on events that occurred before March 8, 2011. The religious discrimination claims relating primarily to events that occurred in 2012 and 2013 involving allegations that she wasn’t permitted to leave her religious materials in the lobby after she filed her HUD complaint in August 2012, and that she was required to attend political meetings during the 2012 presidential election campaign may go to trial.

With respect to the retaliation claim, the resident had to show a causal link between her protected activity and the alleged retaliation. Here, she alleged that her protected activity was the filing of HUD and PHRC complaints in August 2012 and March 2013, and that the manager failed to properly fill out her HUD recertification paperwork in May 2014. Therefore, at minimum, approximately 14 months elapsed between the protected activity and the adverse action. The court stated that that time period is insufficient to create an inference of causation on its own. And looking at the record at the whole, the court ruled that the resident presented no other evidence that creates an inference of causation, particularly as she acknowledged that the owner properly submitted her paperwork in May 2013.

  • LLoyd v. Presby’s Inspired Life, May 2017
Recent Court Rulings
    • Related Articles

      Owner Not Liable for Discriminatory Retaliation

      Owner Not Liable for Former Employee’s Retaliation Claims

      HUD Not Liable for Site Owner's Alleged Maintenance Deficiencies

    • Publications
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Co-op & Condo Case Law Tracker Digest
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • New York Landlord v. Tenant
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    • Additional Links
      • Contact Us
      • Advertise
      • Group Subscriptions
      • Privacy Policy
    • Boards of Advisors
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    ©2025. All Rights Reserved. Content: The Habitat Group. CMS, Hosting & Web Development: ePublishing
    The Habitat Group Logo
    • NY Apartment Law
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • New York Landlord V. Tenant
      • Co-Op & Condo Case Law Digest
      • New York Rent Regulation Checklist, Fourth Edition
      • 2025 New York City Apartment Management Checklist
    • Fair & Affordable Housing
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
      • Fair Housing Boot Camp. Basic Training For New Hires
    • Commercial Lease Law
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
        • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
      • Best Commercial Lease Clauses: Tenant's Edition
    • Guidebooks
    • May 19, 2025
    • Log In
    • Log Out
    • My Account
    • Subscribe
    • May 19, 2025
    AHMI Logo.webp
    • Archives
    • Main Articles
      • Features
      • Certification
      • Compliance
      • Crime & Security
      • Dealing with Households
      • Income Calculations
      • Maintenance
      • Screening Applicants
    • Departments
      • Dos and Don'ts
      • Q and A
      • Recent Court Rulings
      • HUD Audits
      • In the News
      • Ask the Insider
        • Send Us A Question
    • eAlerts
    • Blogs
    Free Issue
    The Habitat Group Logo
    May 19, 2025
    • Log In
    • Log Out
    • My Account