SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(US)(ca8) 163

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Suellen Klossner – Appellant
Versus
IADU Table Mound MHP LLC – Respondent



No. 21-3503 ___________________________

Suellen Klossner,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

IADU Table Mound MHP, LLC,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant,

Impact MHC Management, LLC,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.

------------------------------ United States; Disability Rights Iowa; Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; MHAction,

lllllllllllllllllllllAmici on Behalf of Appellee. ___________________________

No. 21-3544 ___________________________

Suellen Klossner,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant,

v. IADU Table Mound MHP, LLC,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee,

Impact MHC Management, LLC,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee. ____________

Appeals from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________

Submitted: September 21, 2022 Filed: April 10, 2023 ____________ Before COLLOTON, WOLLMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ COLLOTON, Circuit Judge.

This appeal concerns the scope of a landlord’s duty under the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 to make “reasonable accommodations” for the “handicap” of a tenant. The question is whether that duty extends to “accommodating” a tenant’s lack of income by accepting a government housing voucher that the landlord otherwise would not accept from a low-income tenant. We conclude that while the statute requires a landlord to make reasonable accommodations that directly ameliorate the handicap of a tenant, the obligation does not extend to alleviating a tenant’s lack of money to pay rent. The district court believed that the landlord’s position was “facially appealing,” but thought itself constrained by a decision of the Supreme Court on a different issue to enter an injunction in favor of the tenant. We respectfully disagree, and therefore vacate the injunction.

-2- I.

Suellen Klossner has lived in a mobile-home park in Dubuque, Iowa, since 2009. The park is owned by IADU Table Mound MHP, LLC, which is controlled by Impact MHC Management, LLC. Tenants in the park pay rent for a lot where they can situate a mobile home. Klossner receives income from government programs that she used to pay her rent for ten years. She is unable to work full-time due to psychiatric and physical disabilities.

In 2019, the City of Dubuque approved a measure allowing the local public housing authority to provide residents of mobile-home parks with housing choice vouchers that could be used to supplement their rent payments. Under this voucher program, the federal government provides funds to local public housing agencies, which in turn may distribute them to low-income tenants. As the rent on Klossner’s lot increased, she received a voucher and sought to use it to supplement her rent payments, but the companies declined to accept the voucher.

The companies explained that federal law does not require landlords to accept housing choice vouchers, and that Impact declines to do so except in limited circumstances: where state law requires acceptance or where the company has pu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top