IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
RONALD STEVENS and BYRON ANSTINE
d/b/a KNOLLWOOD PARTNERS;
IRENE HAMMOND,
Defendants
____________________________________
CONSENT DECREE
The United States initiated this action pursuant to Section
814 of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3614, alleging that the
Defendants have been engaged in a pattern or practice of
discrimination on the basis of familial status in the rental of
dwellings at Knollwood Apartments ("Knollwood"), in violation of
the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.
Knollwood is located in Phoenixville, Pennsylvania and was
owned by Defendants Ronald Stevens and Byron Anstine, d/b/a
Knollwood Partners until November 2, 1998, when the apartment
complex was sold by Knollwood Partners. The partnership was
liquidated following the sale of Knollwood.
Defendant Irene Hammond has worked as the property manager
at Knollwood since approximately 1993. Following the sale, she
has continued to work for the new owners.
From April 1997 through April 1998, the United States and
the Fair Housing Council of Suburban Philadelphia conducted a
series of tests at Knollwood Apartments. The United States
alleges that the testing evidence reveals that the Defendants
have engaged in discriminatory housing practices on the basis of
familial status at Knollwood. During the testing period,
Defendant Irene Hammond performed the responsibilities of a
rental agent, including responding to all inquiries about
apartment vacancies and availability. The United States notified
the Defendants of the allegations by letter dated December 28,
1998.
The United States alleges that the testing evidence at
Knollwood shows that applicants with children were told that they
could only rent units on the first floor of the apartment complex
while applicants with no children were permitted to rent any
vacant units in the complex. Additionally, the testing evidence
showed that the same information given to applicants without
children regarding apartment availabilities was not given to
applicants with children; applicants with children were falsely
told that certain apartments were unavailable while applicants
without children were told of and shown available apartments.
Defendants deny the United States' allegations. Defendants
contend that families with children were not denied rental
opportunities at Knollwood. Defendants submitted documentary
information concerning alleged rental practices at Knollwood,
including identities and apartment locations of current and
former tenants of the complex who reside with children.
The United States alleges that the evidence demonstrates
that the Defendants refused to rent, refused to negotiate for the
rental of and/or otherwise made housing unavailable to a group of
persons because of their familial status, in violation of 42
U.S.C. §3604(a); discriminated in the terms and conditions, or
privileges of the rental of a dwelling that indicated a
preference or discrimination on the basis of familial status in
violation of 42 U.S.C. §3604(b); made statements with respect to
the rental of a dwelling that indicated a preference or
discrimination based on a person's familial status in violation
of 42 U.S.C. §3604(c); and represented to persons because of
their familial status that dwellings were not available for
rental when such dwellings were in fact so available, in
violation of 42 U.S.C. §3604(d).
In an effort to avoid costly litigation, the United States
and the Defendants have voluntarily agreed, as indicated by the
signatures below, to resolve the United State's claims against
the Defendants without the necessity of a hearing on the merits,
which will include the payment of damages by Defendants. This
Agreement does not constitute an admission by the Defendants of
any violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), (b), (c) and (d), and the
Defendants specifically deny and disclaim any violation of the
aforementioned statutes. Although Knollwood Partners has been
liquidated, the payment of damages by Defendants Stevens and
Anstine is related directly and indirectly to their current
business, which was similar to the business conducted by
Knollwood Partners.
After reviewing the terms contained herein, the Court
concludes that the entry of this Consent Order comports with the
Fair Housing Act and other federal laws, and is appropriate under
these circumstances.
Therefore, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED:
- Injunctive Relief As to Defendant Stevens
Defendant Ronald Stevens, and his agents, employees,
representatives, principals, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors and assigns are enjoined, with
respect to the rental of dwelling units at any apartment complex
under his ownership and/or control, from:
- Refusing to rent a dwelling unit, refusing or failing to
provide or offer information about a dwelling unit, or otherwise
making unavailable or denying a dwelling unit to any person
because of familial status;
- Discriminating against any person in the terms,
conditions or privileges of renting a dwelling unit, or in the
provision of services or facilities in connection therewith,
because of familial status;
- Making, printing, publishing, or causing to be made,
printed, or published any notice, statement or advertisement with
respect to the rental of a dwelling unit that states any
preference, limitation or discrimination based on familial
status;
- Misrepresenting to any person because of familial status
that any dwelling unit is not available for inspection or rental
when such dwelling unit is, in fact, so available; and
- Engaging in any other discriminatory housing practice
prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601, et seq.
- Injunctive Relief As to Defendant Anstine
Defendant Byron Anstine, and his agents, employees,
representatives, principals, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors and assigns are enjoined, with
respect to the rental of dwelling units at any apartment complex
under his ownership and/or control, from:
- Refusing to rent a dwelling unit, refusing or failing to
provide or offer information about a dwelling unit, or otherwise
making unavailable or denying a dwelling unit to any person
because of familial status;
- Discriminating against any person in the terms,
conditions or privileges of renting a dwelling unit, or in the
provision of services or facilities in connection therewith,
because of familial status;
- Making, printing, publishing, or causing to be made,
printed, or published any notice, statement or advertisement with
respect to the rental of a dwelling unit that states any
preference, limitation or discrimination based on familial
status;
- Misrepresenting to any person because of familial status
that any dwelling unit is not available for inspection or rental
when such dwelling unit is, in fact, so available; and
- Engaging in any other discriminatory housing practice
prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601, et seq.
- Injunctive Relief as to Defendant Irene Hammond
Defendant Irene Hammond, and her agents, employees,
representatives, principals, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors and assigns are enjoined, with
respect to the rental of dwelling units at Knollwood Apartments
or any other apartment complex, from:
- Refusing to rent a dwelling unit, refusing or failing to
provide or offer information about a dwelling unit, or otherwise
making unavailable or denying a dwelling unit to any person
because of familial status;
- Discriminating against any person in the terms,
conditions or privileges of renting a dwelling unit, or in the
provision of services or facilities in connection therewith,
because of familial status;
- Making, printing, publishing, or causing to be made,
printed, or published any notice, statement or advertisement with
respect to the rental of a dwelling unit that states any
preference, limitation or discrimination based on familial
status;
- Misrepresenting to any person because of familial status
that any dwelling unit is not available for inspection or rental
when such dwelling unit is, in fact, so available; and
- Engaging in any other discriminatory housing practice
prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601, et seq.
- Mandatory Training for Defendant Irene Hammond
- Within ninety (90) days after the date of entry of this
Consent Decree, the Defendant Irene Hammond shall complete an
educational program, to be conducted by the Public Interest Law
Center of Philadelphia for the cost of One Thousand Dollars
($1,000.00), to be paid by the Defendants, that shall include the
following:
- Informing Irene Hammond of her duties and obligations
under the federal Fair Housing Act and applicable state laws;
- Providing Irene Hammond with a copy of the federal Fair
Housing Act;
- Instructing Irene Hammond on procedures to ensure that
family status does not enter into the process of providing
information to persons who inquire about renting; and
- A question and answer session to review each of the
foregoing areas.
- Within ten (10) business days after entry of this
Consent Decree, Defendants shall provide to counsel for the
United States the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) by check
payable to the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia.
- The United States, on behalf of the Public Interest Law
Center, states that the training session will not be publicized or in any way communicated to the general public.
- Scope and Duration of Consent Order
- The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to
Defendant Ronald Stevens, and his agents, employees,
representative, principals, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors and assigns.
- The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to
Defendant Byron Anstine, and his agents, employees,
representative, principals, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors and assigns.
- The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to
Defendant Irene Hammond, and her agents, employees,
representative, principals, executors, administrators, personal
representatives, successors and assigns.
- This Consent Order is effective immediately upon its
entry by the Court and shall remain in effect for two (2) years
from the date of entry.
- The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action and
over the Defendants during the two-year period specified above.
- The United States may move the Court to extend the
period in which this Order is in effect, with respect to a
particular Defendant(s), if it determines that a Defendant(s)
likely violated one or more terms of this Order or if the
interests of justice otherwise require an extension of the terms
of the Order.
- The parties to this Consent Order shall endeavor in good
faith to resolve informally any differences regarding
interpretation of and compliance with this Order prior to
bringing such matters to the Court for resolution. However, in
the event that a Defendant(s) either fails to perform in a timely
manner any act required by this Order or acts in violation of any
provision of this Order, the United States may move the Court to
impose any remedy authorized by law or equity, including, but not
limited to, an order requiring performance or non-performance of
certain acts and an award of any damages, costs, and attorneys'
fees that may have been occasioned by the Defendant's or the
Defendants' non-action or actions.
- Any time period set forth within this Order for the
performance of any act may be changed by written agreement
between the parties.
- Monetary Damages
- Within ten (10) business days after entry of this Order,
Defendants shall provide to counsel for the United States the sum
of Twenty-four Thousand Dollars ($24,000.00) by check payable to
the National Fair Housing Alliance, a fair housing organization
that is engaged in the business of eradicating housing
discrimination.
- Civil Penalty
- Within thirty (30) days after the entry of this Consent
Order, the Defendants shall pay the sum of Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000.00) to the United States as a civil penalty, pursuant to
42 U.S.C. 3614 (d)(1)(C). This payment shall be delivered to
counsel for the United States in the form of a check payable to
the "United States Department of Justice."
- In the event that any of the Defendants or their agents
or employees are found liable for any future violation(s) of the
Fair Housing Act, such violation(s) may constitute a "subsequent
violation" pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3614(d).
ORDERED this ____ day of _________, 2000.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The undersigned agree to and request the entry of this
Consent Order:
For the United States:
BILL LANN LEE
Assistant Attorney General
ISABELLE M. THABAULT
Deputy Chief
CHARLA D. JACKSON
Trial Attorney
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Housing and Civil Enforcment Section
P.O. Box 65998
Washington, D.C. 20035-5998
(202)353-9705
Michael Stiles
United States Attorney
(E.D. Pa.)
Nancy Griffin
Assistant United States Attorney
615 Chestnut Street
Suite 1250
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(215) 451-5200
For the Defendants:
GARY B. EIDELMAN
Saul, Ewing, Remick & Saul, L.L.P.
100 South Charles Street
Baltimore, MD 21201-2773
(410)332-8600
ATTACHMENT A
On _________________________, 2000, I was instructed by
___________________ with respect to my responsibilities under the
federal Fair Housing Act and applicable state laws. I have
received copies of and have read the federal Fair Housing Act. I
was instructed on procedures to ensure that family status does
not enter into the process of providing information to persons
who inquire about renting, and I was given the opportunity to ask
questions and review each of the foregoing areas. I understand
my legal responsibilities and will comply with those
responsibilities. I further understand that the Court may impose
sanctions on me if I violate a provision of this Order.
_____________________________
(Signature)
_____________________________
(Print name)
_____________________________
(Date)