Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988 did make a system of administrative law judges to hear housing discrimination cases to help against the illegal actions. Other examples of federal legislation may include increased federal legislation enforcement, scattered-site housing, [ 21 ] or state and local enforcement on a more concentrated level ...
Hills v. Gautreaux, 425 U.S. 284 (1976), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court.. In this case, a number of Chicago families living in housing projects were awarded Section 8 vouchers allowing them to move to the suburbs in compensation for the housing project's substandard conditions.
Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com, LLC, 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008), [1] is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) did not apply to an interactive online operator whose questionnaire violated the Fair Housing Act.
Jul. 30—Toledo landlord Anthony Hubbard will no longer be allowed to manage rental properties if a settlement reached in a Fair Housing Act lawsuit against him and two other defendants is ...
A third photograph, Johnson signing the Fair Housing Act into law on April 11, 1968, brings sudden closure. The president is surrounded by 20 men, including Sens. Walter Mondale and Edward Brooke ...
Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 576 U.S. 519 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court analyzed whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. [1]
In 1985, the Fair Housing Act created the now-repealed Regional Contribution Agreement system. The RCAs meant that towns could pay to get out of up to half of their affordable housing obligation by funding affordable housing elsewhere as required by the New Jersey Supreme Court's Mt. Laurel decision. [23]
DFEH also stated that the settlement would impact its case and filed their own formal complaint to challenge the settlement. DFEH said that the settlement would remove the employees from protection of California's law which is outside of the jurisdiction of the EEOC, and that provisions of the settlement would allow destruction of evidence ...