Case to Watch: HUD Complaint Against Condo Association Ban on Religious Meetings
A condo association board's ban on religious meetings and displays is the subject of a complaint to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
August 31, 2018 at 11:02 AM
4 minute read
The community social room is typically one of the most popular amenities in condominium and homeowner association communities, and as such it must be governed with care in order to ensure all entitled residents an opportunity to enjoy it.
Bans of any kind against the use of the community room, such as those for specific gatherings, should be considered only after prudent consultation with experienced legal counsel. Furthermore, a ban against religious gatherings can prove particularly troublesome due to the potential for violations of the federal Fair Housing Act.
Such cautious considerations may have been overlooked in the decision by a board of directors of a Port Charlotte condo association to prohibit prayers and religious meetings in their community's common room. The ban by the association for the Cambridge House of Port Charlotte led to the filing of a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development alleging violations of the federal Fair Housing Act as well as Florida condominium laws.
The complaint was filed on March 6 on behalf of Cambridge House resident Donna Dunbar, who is a lay minister in the Seventh Day Adventist Church and the leader of a women's Bible study group that formerly met in the Cambridge House common room for two hours on Monday mornings. It alleges that on Feb. 6 the Cambridge House's board of directors adopted a resolution to prohibit prayers, religious services and religious meetings in the common areas.
The allegations also state that Dunbar and her Bible study group faced discrimination before the Cambridge House prohibited their meetings, claiming that the board of directors had previously required her to purchase insurance in order to hold the gatherings. Dunbar claims this requirement was despite the Cambridge House not mandating that other groups holding movie and game nights obtain similar coverage.
After the ban was imposed, Dunbar alleges that religious displays at Cambridge House were removed, including the removal by property management staff of a St. Francis of Assisi fountain and statue. Dunbar further claims that a sign was posted on an organ in the lobby declaring: “ANY AND ALL CHRISTIAN MUSIC IS BANNED!”
In addition to the discrimination claims, the complaint also alleges violations of state condominium laws based upon the board of directors' failure to include the voted-upon resolution on the religious ban in the agenda for the board meeting. Dunbar's complaint, filed by her legal counsel with Greenberg Traurig, asserts that the association's edict “manifests profound hostility to Christians and indeed all religious residents, and discriminates against any resident who wishes to express their faith beyond the walls of their private residence.”
While there have been several Florida appellate court decisions over similar association rules, this federal Fair Housing Act complaint will be very closely watched by the state's community associations and the professionals serving them. If HUD finds in favor of Dunbar and takes severe measures against the Cambridge House, associations will need to take careful note of the reasoning behind HUD's decision.
The onus is now on the federal agency to conduct a thorough examination of the allegations in order to reach a conclusion based upon all of the available information and prior legal precedent. In addition to deciding this particular claim, HUD's decision should clearly spell out what constitutes federal Fair Housing Act discrimination violations involving religious gatherings and displays in communities with associations.
In the meantime, Florida community associations should look to this complaint and be forewarned to tread carefully and always consult with legal counsel when considering any sort of meeting bans.
Michael Toback is an associate with Siegfried, Rivera, Hyman, Lerner, De La Torre, Mars & Sobel in West Palm Beach. He focuses his practice on community association law.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All830 Brickell is Open After Two-Year Delay That Led to Winston & Strawn Pulling Lease
3 minute readMiami Lawyers Beat Other Local Sectors, Attorneys Elsewhere in Office Usage
3 minute read'Would've Been Snoring Without Ya': Fort Lauderdale Jury Awards $4.5 Million in Condo Investment Spat
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Justices Will Weigh Constitutionality of Law Allowing Terror Victims to Sue PLO
- 2Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 3OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 44th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 5Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250