CopyCited 22 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 34, 2002 Fla. LEXIS 1, 2002 WL 5483
...natory. Rather, it is directly related to providing reasonable accommodations to enable handicapped persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a unit in the complex through the assistance of Abilities. As noted by petitioner, both federal law and section 760.23, Florida Statutes (2000), generally prohibit discrimination in the *464 sale or rental of a dwelling based on, among other things, a person's handicap. For purposes of section 760.23(7) and (8), [8] pertaining to discrimination because of a handicap, discrimination includes "[a] refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling." § 760.23(9)(b), Fla....
...A/K/A 4215 East Bay Drive, # 1203D, Clearwater, Florida 33764. (Emphasis added.) The legal descriptions for the other three units involved in this case contain similar language. [7] It should be noted that a copy of the "Abilities Amendment" is not in the record. [8] Section 760.23(7)-(8) provides: (7) It is unlawful to discriminate in the sale or rental of, or to otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer or renter because of a handicap of: (a) That buyer or renter; (b) A person residing in or i...
...n connection with such dwelling, because of a handicap of: (a) That buyer or renter; (b) A person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after it is sold, rented, or made available; or (c) Any person associated with the buyer or renter. § 760.23(7)-(8), Fla....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14145, 2003 WL 21960021
...The only alleged discriminatory conduct by FLECA occurred three years after the purchase by the Plaintiffs of their home, and this conduct did not "otherwise make unavailable" the Plaintiffs' home. Therefore, FLECA cannot be liable to Plaintiffs under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a) or Fla. Stat. § 760.23(1)....
...fter the Plaintiffs purchased their house and there is no evidence that any discriminatory conduct precluded Plaintiffs' ownership of a dwelling, this Court concludes that FLECA cannot be liable to Plaintiffs under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b) or Fla. Stat. § 760.23(2)....
...The HUD regulation suggests that Section 3604(c) is limited to discriminatory advertisements, statements, and notices related to a sale or rental of a property. See id. Based on the foregoing, this Court concludes that there was no violation of Section 3604(c) or Fla. Stat. § 760.23(3) because any alleged discriminatory conduct was not in connection with a sale or rental or potential sale or rental of Plaintiffs' dwelling....
...[9] The almost identically worded section of the FFHA reads: "[i]t is unlawful to refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny a dwelling to any person because of . . . familial status . . . ." Fla. Stat. § 760.23(1)....
...[19] The almost identically worded section of the FFHA reads: "[i]t is unlawful to discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of a sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities' in connection therewith, because of . . . familial status . . . ." Fla. Stat. § 760.23(2)....
...vertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on . . . familial status . . . or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination. See Fla. Stat. 760.23(3)....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136250, 2015 WL 5737350
...t prospective tenants provide copies of report cards for persons under the age of 18 (the “Report Card Requirement”). DE 302-2(E); see DE 304 at 5. Plaintiffs contend that the Report Card Requirement violates 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (a) and Fla. Stat. § 760.23 (1) because, they argue, it amounts to a refusal to rent, or a refusal to negotiate for the rental of, a dwelling on the basis of familial status....
...) that persons under the age of 18 must be in their home or on their patio after sunset (the “Curfew Rule”). See DE 93-4 at 3-4. Plaintiffs contend that the Proper Attire, Loitering, and Curfew Rules violated 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (b) and Fla. Stat. § 760.23 (2) because, Plaintiffs argue, they amounted to discrimination in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of familial status....
...Cornerstone Residential Mgmt., Inc., No. 05-60033-CIV-JOHNSON,
2010 WL 427436 , at *2 (S.D.Fla. Feb. 1, 2010) (citing Dornbach v. Holley,
854 So.2d 211, 213 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2002); Loren v. Sasser,
309 F.3d 1296 , 1300 n. 9 (11th Cir.2002)). . See 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (a); Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (1). . See 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (b); Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (2). . See 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (c); Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (3)....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida
...DISCUSSION The Complaint asserts five claims against Defendant: (1) in Count I, violations of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604 (f)(1)-(2), 3617 ; (2) in Count II, violation of the Florida Fair Housing Act, Fla. Stat. §
760.37 ; (3) in Count III, violation of the Florida Fair Housing Act, Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (3) ; (4) in Count IV, violation of the Florida Fair Housing Act, Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (2) ; and (5) in Count V, common law intentional infliction of emotional distress....
...Here, Plaintiff alleges Defendant's conduct interfered with the exercise and enjoyment of her right under the Fair Housing Act to be "protect[ed] from unlawful discrimination because of her sex." (D.E. 1 at ¶ 4.) And by also alleging in Counts III and IV violations of Florida Statute Sections 760.23(2) - (3), the identical state companion provisions to 42 U.S.C....
...Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the claims under Sections 3604(f)(1)-(2) is accordingly GRANTED . B. ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE FLORIDA FAIR HOUSING ACT Plaintiff brings three Counts alleging Florida Fair Housing Act violations: in Count II, Fla. Stat. §
760.37 ; in Count III, Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (3) ; and in Count VI, Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (2)....
...As Plaintiff makes clear, she "has not made any such claims that Defendant took retaliatory and adverse action against Plaintiff for filing her claim." (D.E. 8 at 5.) Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Count II is therefore DENIED . 2.) Count III - Fla. Stat. Section 760.23(3) In Count III, Plaintiff asserts Defendant violated Florida Statute Section 760.23(3), which makes it unlawful to "make, print, or publish ......
...any notice, statement, or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on ... sex ... or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination." To state a claim under Section 760.23(3), Plaintiff must allege factual matter showing: (1) Defendant made a statement; (2) the statement was made with respect to the rental of a dwelling; and (3) the statement indicated a preference, limitation, or discrimination on the basis of a protected class....
...ch 2017." Id. at ¶ 16 (e). Defendant argues Count III should be dismissed because Plaintiff fails to plead factual matter showing any statements were made "with respect to the rental of a dwelling." As explained below, Plaintiff adequately states a Section 760.23(3) claim....
...minatory animus. See supra Sec. III.A.1.c. And these allegations are cap-stoned by the allegation Defendant followed through with his threat not to renew Plaintiff's lease upon expiration. *1298 Accordingly, the Complaint adequately pleads the final Section 760.23(3) claim element: that Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff on the basis of sex in his decision not to renew Plaintiff's lease....
...failure "to even allege that she attempted to renew the lease but was refused." (D.E. 9 at 5.) This argument is amiss. The plausibility standard applies to the elements of a claim-that is, Plaintiff must plead "sufficient factual matter" to make her Section
760.23(3) claim "plausible on its face." Iqbal ,
556 U.S. at 678 ,
129 S.Ct. 1937 . But Plaintiff is not required to plead that she intended, or even took action toward renewing her lease to state a claim under Section
760.23(3) because this provision imposes liability for the discriminatory " mak[ing], print[ing], or publish[ing] ... [of] any notice, statement, or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling ... based on ... sex." Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (3) (emphasis added). So, it is irrelevant at the pleading stage whether it is plausible that Plaintiff "wished to remain in [an] allegedly 'hostile environment' " for purposes of stating a Section
760.23(3) claim. Once Plaintiff alleged Defendant made sexually harassing statements concerning the rental, she adequately pleaded her claim. Defendant's motion to dismiss Count III is therefore DENIED. 3.) Count IV - Fla. Stat. Section
760.23(2) Plaintiff's next claim is that Defendant violated Florida Statute Section
760.23(2), which makes it unlawful to "discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of ... sex." To state a claim under Section
760.23(2), Plaintiff must plead facts showing that: (1) Plaintiff is a member of a protected class; (2) the Defendant was aware of it; (3) Plaintiff was ready, willing, and able to rent the apartment; and (4) Defendant refused to allow her to do so....
...Pfizer, Inc. , No. 1:15-cv-21826-KMM,
2016 WL 375008 , at *3 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 1, 2016) (citing St. George v. Pinellas Cnty. ,
285 F.3d 1334 , 1337 (11th Cir. 2002) ). Accordingly, because Plaintiff fails to plead the "ready, willing, and able" element of her Section
760.23(2) claim, Defendant's motion to dismiss Count IV is *1299 GRANTED....
...Here, the Court finds Plaintiff need not allege at the pleading stage that Defendant threatened or exercised violence against her to state a plausible Section 3617 interference claim because, in Counts III and IV, Plaintiff alleges Defendant violated Florida Statute Sections 760.23(2) -(3) -the state companion provisions to Sections 3604(b) -(c)....
...Moreover, the Court is granting Plaintiff leave to amend the Complaint to add claims under Sections 3604(b) -(c), in order to correct an inadvertent pleading error. See supra Sec. III. A.2. The relevant corresponding provisions are: 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (b) and Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (2) ; 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (c) and Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (3) ; and 42 U.S.C. § 3617 and Fla. Stat. §
760.37 . Dismissing Plaintiff's Section
760.23(2) claim for failing to plead Plaintiff was "ready, willing, and able" is not inconsistent with rejecting Defendant's argument that Plaintiff's Section
760.23(3) claim should be dismissed on the same grounds. Section
760.23(2) targets narrower and different behavior than Section
760.23(3) : the former targets only the discriminatory nature of the "terms" and "conditions" of the transaction to sell or rent a dwelling, while the latter targets broader conduct, namely, discriminatory "notice[s], statement[s], or advertisement[s]" made in the management of selling or renting a dwelling. Compare Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (2) (making unlawful "discriminat[ion] against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling....") (emphasis added), with Fla. Stat. §
760.23 (3) (making unlawful the "mak[ing], printi[ng], or publish[ing] ... [of] any notice, statement, or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling....") (emphasis added). This is why being "ready, willing, and able" is a required element of a Section
760.23(2) claim, but not a Section
760.23(3) claim....
