Housing and Civil Enforcement Cases

United States v Morningstar Properties (M.D. Fla.)

On September 19, 2024, the United States filed a complaint and proposed consent order in United States vs. Morningstar Properties, LLC dba Morningstar Storage (M.D. Fla.). The complaint alleges that the defendant engaged in a pattern or practice of violating the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) by selling or otherwise disposing of personal property owned by SCRA-protected servicemembers without obtaining court orders. The proposed order, which still must be approved by the court, requires the defendant to pay $90,000 to three affected servicemembers and a $40,000 civil penalty to the United States. The order also requires the defendant to provide SCRA training to their employees and develop new policies and procedures consistent with the SCRA.

United States v. Hendricks County, Indiana (S.D. Ill.)

On September 18, 2024, the United States filed a complaint and consent decree in United States v. Hendricks County, Indiana (S.D. Ill.) settling allegations that Hendricks County (the County) violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) by twice unlawfully denying zoning approval to Al Hussnain Inc., an Islamic educational organization, seeking to develop a religious seminary, school and residential housing in Hendricks County. The proposed consent decree, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana and must still be approved by the court, resolves a lawsuit filed by the United States. The complaint alleges that the County, facing significant community animus and opposition, denied Al Hussnain’s rezoning applications to develop a mixed-use community containing a residential neighborhood, community center, K-12 religious school, Islamic seminary, and dormitories for seminary students at two different locations in the County, citing concerns that lacked a legitimate basis. The complaint further alleges that Hendricks County repeatedly departed from its own zoning ordinances as well as the county’s processes and procedures for reviewing zoning applications and treated Al Hussnain’s application worse than similar applications brought by non-Muslim developers. The complaint alleges that the County engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful discrimination and denied rights to a group of persons because of religion in violation of the FHA and imposed a substantial burden on the Islamic organization’s religious exercise, treated the organization on less than equal terms with nonreligious assemblies or institutions and discriminated against the organization on the basis of religion in violation of RLUIPA. The consent decree requires Hendricks County to pay monetary damages of $295,000 to Al Hussnain, Inc., a civil penalty of $5,000 to the United States, adopt Fair Housing and Religious Land Use policies, train its officials and employees on the requirements of RLUIPA and the FHA, and establish a procedure for receiving and resolving RLUIPA and FHA complaints.

United States v. OceanFirst Bank (D.N.J.)

On September 18, 2024, the United States filed a complaint and a proposed consent order in Unites States v OceanFirst Bank (D.N.J.). The complaint alleges that OceanFirst violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act by redlining majority-Black, Hispanic, and Asian neighborhoods in Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties in New Jersey. Specifically, the complaint alleges that OceanFirst disproportionately focused its outreach and advertising on majority-white communities, placed its branches in majority-white neighborhoods, and closed its only branches in majority-Black, Hispanic, and Asian neighborhoods in those counties. The proposed order, which still must be approved by the court, requires OceanFirst to invest at least $14 million in a loan subsidy fund to increase access to home mortgage, home improvement, and home refinance loans for residents of these majority-Black, Hispanic, and Asian areas. Additionally, in these same neighborhoods, OceanFirst will spend at least $700,000 on advertising, outreach, and consumer financial education and counseling; spend at least $400,000 to develop community partnerships to provide services that increase access to residential mortgage credit; open a loan production office; and maintain its recently opened full-service branch.

United States v. Tony’s Auto Center (S.D. Cal.)

On August 23, 2024, the United States filed a complaint in United States v. Tony’s Auto Center (S.D. Cal.). The complaint alleges that Tony’s Auto Center, a towing company in Chula Vista, California, violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act case by auctioning, without a court order, a vehicle belonging to a Navy Lieutenant while he was deployed at sea aboard an aircraft carrier.

United States v. Kailua Village Condominium Association, et al. (D. Haw.)

On August 19, 2024, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Hawaii filed an “election” complaint in United States v. Kailua Village Condominium Association, et al. (D. Haw.). The complaint alleges that a homeowners association, board members, property managers, sellers, and selling agents of a unit at a condominium complex in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii violated discriminated on the basis of disability in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) by refusing to sell a unit to a man with paraplegia, subjecting him to discriminatory terms and conditions, making discriminatory statements, refusing to make reasonable accommodations, refusing to permit reasonable modifications, and harassing him. Ron Zentner; Certified Management, Inc., dba Associa Hawaii; Benjamin Willoughby; Bruce Stern; Deborah Stern; Jacqueline J. Frame; and Kona Now LLC, dba Kona Now Realty; and Kona Now Hawaii Island Rentals are also named as defendants in the case. The case was referred to the Division after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.

United States v. Grapevine Housing Authority (N.D. Tex.)

On August 14, 2024, the United States filed a Fair Housing Act “election” complaint in United States v. Grapevine Housing Authority (N.D. Tex.). The complaint alleges that defendant discriminated against a tenant based on disability by denying requests for a reasonable accommodation, terminating his lease, and pursuing an eviction. The case was referred to the Division after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.

United States v Kevin Martin (S.D. Ohio)

On September 17, 2024, the court entered a consent decree in United States v. Martin (S.D. Ohio). The complaint, which was filed on August 15, 2024, alleges that Kevin Martin, who owns and manages residential rental properties in and around Athens, Ohio, sexually harassed female tenants and housing applicants in violation of the Fair Housing Act from at least 2010 to 2020. The consent order requires Martin to pay $165,000 to former female tenants and applicants harmed by his harassment and pay a $5,000 civil penalty to the United States. It also bars Martin from managing residential rental properties, requires him to retain a property manager for properties he continues to own, and mandates training and the adoption of policies and procedures to prevent future discrimination.

Gethsemani Baptist Church, an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation (D. Az.)

On July 29, 2024, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Gethsemani Baptist Church v. City of San Luis (D. Az.), a private lawsuit brought under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Gethsemani Baptist Church filed a complaint against the City of San Luis after the City effectively prohibited the continued operation of its Food Ministry on Church property without a conditional use permit and prohibited the Church from using semi-trucks to drop off food donations at the church, even though analogous nonreligious entities are not prohibited from using semi-trucks on their property. The complaint in the case alleges that the City substantially burdened the Church’s religious exercise by significantly reducing the number of persons that it can feed through its Food Ministry and that the City treats religious uses less favorably than nonreligious assemblies, in violation of RLUIPA’s equal terms provision. The City filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that the church’s RLUIPA claims are not ripe for review because the Church did not apply for a conditional use permit and the City did not conduct an individualized assessment as required by RLUIPA. In its Statement of Interest, the United States explains that the RLUIPA claims are ready to be adjudicated because the City reached a final decision that inflicted considerable harm on the Church and that the City’s actions towards the Church and its application of its code to the Church satisfy RLUIPA’s individualized assessment requirement.

United States v Michael J DeWitte (C. D. Ill.)

On July 18, 2024, the United States filed a complaint in United States v. DeWitte (C.D. Ill.) alleging that Michael DeWitte, a landlord in central Illinois, violated the Fair Housing Act by engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on sex. Specifically, the complaint will allege that DeWitte has sexually harassed actual and prospective female tenants since at least 2002 by, among other things, offering to strip for female tenants, removing his pants while giving a tour to a female housing applicant, exposing his genitals to female tenants, requesting sex in exchange for reduced rent, and evicting female tenants when they did not give in to his sexual advances.

United States v Southwest Key Programs Inc. (W.D. Tex.)

On July 17, 2024, the United States filed a pattern or practice complaint in United States v. Southwest Key Programs, Inc. (W.D. Tex.). The complaint alleges that Southwest Key discriminated because of sex in violation of the Fair Housing Act by subjecting unaccompanied children residing in its shelters to severe and pervasive sexual harassment by employees. The complaint also alleges that Southwest Key failed to take sufficient action to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual abuse and sexual harassment to protect the children in its care. Southwest Key is a national non-profit that currently operates at least 29 shelters in Texas, Arizona, and California, and is the largest private care provider for unaccompanied children in the United States. Unaccompanied children are minors present in the United States without parents or other legal guardians and without lawful immigration status in the United States.

Individuals who believe that they may have been victims of sexual harassment or abuse at Southwest Key shelters or who have other information that may be relevant to this case, may contact the Justice Department’s housing discrimination tip line at 1-833-591-0291. For Spanish dial “2”; then dial “2” for sexual harassment cases; and dial “3” for the Southwest Key lawsuit mailbox. For English dial “1”; then dial “2” for sexual harassment cases; and dial “9” for the Southwest Key lawsuit mailbox. Individuals can also email the Justice Department at southwest.key@usdoj.gov or report through our online portal at civilrights.justice.gov/link/southwestkey.

Las personas que crean haber sido víctimas de acoso o abuso sexual en refugios de Southwest Key o que tienen otra información que puede ser relevante para este caso pueden comunicarse con la línea de consejos de discriminación de vivienda del Departamento de Justicia al 1-833-591-0291. Para español marque “2”; luego marque “2” para casos de acoso sexual; y marque “3” para el buzón de la demanda contra Southwest Key. Para inglés marque “1”; luego marque “2” para casos de acoso sexual; y marque “9” para el buzón de la demanda contra Southwest Key. También se puede enviar un correo electrónico al Departamento de Justicia a southwest.key@usdoj.gov o entregar un informe a través de nuestro portal en línea en civilrights.justice.gov/link/southwestkey.