Recent Property Law Decisions

In plaintiffs' Fair Housing Act (FHA) suit against their condo association for being required to remove a mezuzah from their doorpost under a new rule requiring that common hallways and outside of the doors be kept free of any objects, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor the condo association and its president is reversed for the most part where: 1) the judgment of the district court with respect to plaintiffs' claims under sections 3604(b), 3617 and 1982 is reversed as a trier of fact could conclude that the condo association's  reinterpretation of the hallway rule and clearing of all objects from doorposts was intended to target only group of residents for which the prohibited practice was religiously required; 2) plaintiffs can therefore proceed on an intentional discrimination theory under sections 3604(b), 3617 and 1982; and 3) district court's judgment granting summary judgment against the plaintiffs on their section 3604(a) claim is affirmed.   

Read Bloch v. Frischholz, No. 06-3376

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided November 13, 2009

Judges

Before:  Easterbrook, Chief Judge, and Bauer, Kanne, Wood, Evans, Sykes, Tinder and Posner, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Tinder, Circuit Judge

In plaintiff-church's suit against defendant-village under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act to allow it to relocate to the business district, district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction to allow it to relocate to the property in the interim is affirmed as the church has only a slim chance of success on the merits and any irreparable harm it may suffer does not significantly outweigh the potential harm to the village. 

Read River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, No. 08-2819

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Before:  Cudhay, Manion, and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Williams, Circuit Judge

In a dispute involving insurance liability coverage, district court judgment is affirmed where defendant has no duty to defend the defendant-seller's as the insurance policy limits coverage to property damage, and the buyers' claim for negligent misrepresentation does not allege property damage caused by an accident. 

Read Goderstad v. American Family Mutal Ins. Co., No. 06-3629

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin..
Argued April 7, 2008
Decided June 29, 2009

Judges
Before RIPPLE, WILLIAMS, and SYKES, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by SYKES, Circuit Judge.

Petition for review of an order of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is denied and cross-petition for enforcement is granted where: 1) plaintiff's due process rights were not violated as the agency provided frequent notice that plaintiff chose to ignore; 2) plaintiff's claim that the monetary penalty was unauthorized because the ALJ did not consider her financial resources fails, as plaintiff walked out of the hearing and a person who fails to supply information forfeits any complaint that the decisionmaker was uninformed on some issue; and 3) plaintiff Fung's claims fail as the agency's actions were not arbitrary or capricious, and his attempt to invoke 42 U.S.C. sec. 3603(b)(1) is frivolous. 

Read Ho v. Donovan, No. 08-1763

Appellate Information
Petition for Review and Cross-Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Argued: June 1, 2009
Decided: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and BAUER and EVANS, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge.

In a common law nuisance action, district court's grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where plaintiffs failed to prove either personal injury or property damage, as they did not present evidence that the exposure to contaminants contributed to their ailments and did not present evidence that to establish the effect of the contamination on the value of their property. 

Read Cunningham v. Masterwear Corp., No. 08-1924

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division.
Argued: October 29, 2008
Decided: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before POSNER, MANION, and KANNE, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by POSNER, Circuit Judge.

In a tort and contracts action alleging defendants participated in a fraudulent mortgage-flipping scheme, district court judgment is reversed where: 1) plaintiff's suit is not barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; and 2) plaintiff's suit is not barred by claim preclusion, as claims against the borrower on the note are distinct from whether defendants committed fraud that induced plaintiff to make loans or whether defendant followed plaintiff's prescribed closing procedures. 

Read Freedom Mortgage Corp. v. Burnham Mortgage, Inc., No. 08-3007

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
Argued: June 1, 2009
Decided: June 23, 2009

Judges
Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and BAUER and EVANS, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge.

District court judgment dismissing the suit against plaintiff and ruling that the action against the U.S. does not come within the court's subject matter jurisdiction is affirmed with modifications where: 1) plaintiff's action was untimely; 2) someone who wants a legal right to use land owned by the U.S. must act to vindicate the claim; and 3) the U.S. need not evict the interloper by force. 

Read Wisconsin Valley Improvement Co. v. US, No. 08-4300

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.
Argued: May 12, 2009
Decided: June 22, 2009

Judges
Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, SYKES, Circuit Judge, and VAN BOKKELEN, District Judge.
Opinion by EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge.