Correct answer: d 

Reason: The principles discussed in Pitfall #2 apply to this situation

     Pitfall #2: Requiring Children to Use Separate Facilities 

Although children aren’t listed as a protected class under the FHA, excluding children from the pool or other common use amenity is a form of disparate impact discrimination against families with children. And while segregation might keep kids from drowning, there are less restrictive ways that a landlord could accomplish that legitimate safety purpose. So, d. is the correct answer.

Wrong answers explained: 

a. is wrong because segregation isn’t allowed even if the kiddie pool is just as nice and convenient as the main pool. As in other aspects of public life governed by civil rights laws, the notion of “separate but equal” is unacceptable in housing regardless of whether it’s based on race, religion, family status, or any other protected characteristic. 

b. is wrong because restricting kids to a uniformly shallow pool isn’t the only or least restrictive way to prevent drownings. The landlord could accomplish the same objective by letting children use the main pool and implementing ground rules to ensure they do so safely. 

c. is wrong because you’re not allowed to commit discrimination against families with children or any other protected class just because your tenants ask you to do so. 

Correct answer: a

Reason: The principles discussed in Pitfall #4 come into play in this situation

     Pitfall #4: Requiring Children to Be Supervised by a Parent or Adult Guardian

Health and safety rules that target “children” and “adults” are generally problematic because of their discriminatory impact on families with children. However, such restrictions are more justifiable when they’re based on objective sources, such as local laws or manufacturers’ instructions. The challenge then becomes to keep those restrictions no broader than necessary to achieve the safety purpose. In this case, requiring children under age 12 to be supervised by an adult is the narrowest formulation possible. So, a. is the correct answer.

Wrong answers explained: 

b. is wrong because the manufacturer’s instructions just say that the child user should be supervised by an “adult.” They don’t say anything about which adult must do the supervising. By substituting “parent” for “adult,” you’re not only broadening the restriction but also basing it on a family relationship. 

c. is wrong for the same reason that b. is wrong. While adding “adult guardian” to “parent” does broaden the restriction a little, requiring parental or adult guardian supervision goes beyond the manufacturer’s safety recommendation and brings family status discrimination into play.   

Correct answer: b

Reason: This scenario addresses the principles discussed under Pitfall #8: 

     Pitfall #8: Banning All Animals 

The FHA and ADA both require landlords to make reasonable accommodations to pet restrictions and policies for the disabled. But the types of animals the landlord must permit depend on which law applies to the facility. Because the business center in this scenario is open to the public as well as tenants, it would be deemed a “public accommodation” under the ADA. Result: The landlord would have to make an exemption to its no-animals rule for service animals. So, b. is the correct answer. 

Wrong answers explained: 

a. is wrong because a blanket rule purporting to ban all “pets” or “animals” flies in the face of the duty to make reasonable accommodations. That’s why it needs to be modified to allow for assistance or service animals. 

c. is wrong because, as noted above, the business center in this situation is subject to the ADA as a public accommodation. And that means the landlord must allow service animals. The FHA duty to accommodate assistance animals would apply to the residential parts of the community that are reserved for tenants and not open to the general public.   

Answer: C. Deliberately.  In the concluding chapter of Walden (a book about his experiences living for two years, two months, and two days by Walden Pond), Thoreau wrote: “I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.”