Case: United States v. Latvian Tower Condominium

8:08-cv-00489 | U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska

Filed Date: Oct. 29, 2008

Closed Date: 2013

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On October 29, 2008, the United States filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601-3619, against a condominium association and its president. The U.S. brought the case on behalf of two residents of the condominium complex who claimed the defendants engaged in illegal discrimination on the basis of familial status by declaring in their Amended Master Deed and Declaration that no unit should be "sold or leased to …

On October 29, 2008, the United States filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601-3619, against a condominium association and its president. The U.S. brought the case on behalf of two residents of the condominium complex who claimed the defendants engaged in illegal discrimination on the basis of familial status by declaring in their Amended Master Deed and Declaration that no unit should be "sold or leased to a person who has a child under the age of 16 who will occupy or reside in the unit 180 days or more a year." The complainants wished to sell their unit, but the U.S. alleged that they were unable to do so because the Association interfered with the sale by actively discouraging prospective buyers who had children. The complainants intervened in the case on August 10, 2009.

After discovery, the parties entered mediation, and on March 3, 2010, the Court (Judge Warren K. Urbom) approved a three-year consent decree. In addition to a general prohibition against discrimination in the sale or rental of the condominium units, the decree required the defendants to develop and post a non-discrimination policy and to amend the master deed to excise the prohibition against families with children. Defendants agreed to pay $77,500 to the complainants, an additional $35,000 to other aggrieved parties, and a $15,000 civil penalty to the United States.

The consent decree terminated in 2013 without any further litigation. The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Clearinghouse (12/1/2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5707922/parties/united-states-v-latvian-tower-condominium/


Judge(s)

Urbom, Warren Keith (Nebraska)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Dull, Robin L. (District of Columbia)

Gilg, Deborah R. (Nebraska)

Kelly, Laurie A. (Nebraska)

Stecher, Joe W. (Nebraska)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

McVay, James B. (Nebraska)

Moore, Scott P. (Nebraska)

Ruge, Douglas W. (Nebraska)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Bond, Rebecca B. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Urbom, Warren Keith (Nebraska)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Dull, Robin L. (District of Columbia)

Gilg, Deborah R. (Nebraska)

Kelly, Laurie A. (Nebraska)

Stecher, Joe W. (Nebraska)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

McVay, James B. (Nebraska)

Moore, Scott P. (Nebraska)

Ruge, Douglas W. (Nebraska)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Bond, Rebecca B. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

8:08-cv-00489

Docket

United States v. The Latvian Condominium

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

Docket
1

8:08-cv-00489

Complaint

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

Complaint
81

8:08-cv-00489

Consent Decree

United States v. The Latvian Tower Condominium

March 3, 2010

March 3, 2010

Settlement Agreement

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5707922/united-states-v-latvian-tower-condominium/

Last updated Sept. 1, 2022, 3:03 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
18

ORDER - On the court's own motion, IT IS ORDERED: The time of the telephone planning conference on May 21, 2009 is changed from 9:00 to 10:00 a.m. Plaintiffs counsel shall place the call. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (LKH)

May 13, 2009

May 13, 2009

RECAP
22

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The government has filed an unopposed motion for a thirty-day extension of its deadline for disclosing expert witnesses, and seeks an order revising the progression schedule. (Filing No. 21 ). The motion does not include a pro posed modified progression schedule. In support of its motion, the government states it anticipates presenting a settlement proposal to the defendants in the near future. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The government's motion to continue, (Filin g No. 21 ), is granted, and the government's deadline for disclosing expert witnesses is extended to July 30, 2009. 2) On or before July 30, 2009, the parties shall either file a joint motion for dismissal or statement that this case has been settled, or they shall jointly file a motion setting forth their proposed deadlines for continued progression of this case to trial. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (LKH)

June 22, 2009

June 22, 2009

RECAP
27

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 24 Motion to Intervene. The motion to intervene as plaintiffs filed by James A. Brown and Jeffrey S. Daubman, (filing no. 24 ), is granted. The intervening plaintiffs shall file their complaint, a copy of which is attached to their motion, on or before August 14, 2009. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)

Aug. 7, 2009

Aug. 7, 2009

RECAP
35

ORDER granting 33 Joint Motion for Protective Order. The parties' are ordered to comply with the terms of the Confidentiality and Protective Order set forth herein. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)

Sept. 9, 2009

Sept. 9, 2009

RECAP
42

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding pending motions. The defendants' unopposed motion, (filing no. 37 ), is granted, and the defendants shall file their response to the intervenors' complaint on or before September 28, 2009. The defendants 39; unopposed motion, (filing no. 38 ), is granted, and the defendants shall file their amended answer to the government's complaint on or before September 28, 2009. The parties' joint motions to extend, (filing nos. 40 and 41 ), are gr anted, and the deadlines for disclosing experts and their reports are continued as follows: By the plaintiff/intervening plaintiffs: October 12, 2009. By the defendants: November 12, 2009. Plaintiff/intervening plaintiffs' rebuttal expert(s): November 26, 2009. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)

Sept. 28, 2009

Sept. 28, 2009

RECAP
77

ORDER. It is ordered that: (1)The following matter previously scheduled before the undersigned is herewith referred to Judge Zwart, to wit,(A)Nature of hearing:Pretrial conference.(B)Date and time of hearing: Thursday, March 25, 2010, at 11:00 a.m.( C)Place of hearing: Judge Zwart's chambers, Room 566, United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 100 Centennial Mall, North, Lincoln, Nebraska.(2)Judge Zwart will issue a report and recommendation or order as is appropriate. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (KLL, )

Jan. 20, 2010

Jan. 20, 2010

RECAP
81

ORDER granting 79 Motion for Settlement by entering a Consent Order.Ordered by Senior Judge Warren K. Urbom. (EJL)

March 3, 2010

March 3, 2010

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Nebraska

Case Type(s):

Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 29, 2008

Closing Date: 2013

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

United States, on behalf of complainants whose ability to sell their condo unit was undermined by a "no family" restriction on the master deed.

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Latvian Tower Condominium (Omaha), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Fair Housing Act/Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: 127,500

Order Duration: 2010 - 2013

Content of Injunction:

Develop anti-discrimination policy

Discrimination Prohibition

Provide antidiscrimination training

Reporting

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Housing

Discrimination-area:

Housing Sales/Rental

Discrimination-basis:

Family discrimination