Carol Vorchheimer v. Philadelphian Owners Associati
903 F.3d 100
| 3rd Cir. | 2018Background
- Plaintiff Carol Vorchheimer is disabled (uses a rolling walker) and lived in The Philadelphian condominium with a reserved outdoor parking spot.
- Vorchheimer habitually left her rolling walker in the building lobby because she could not fold, lift, or place it in her car, and she asserted she needed immediate access without waiting.
- Building management repeatedly removed the walker from the lobby and offered four alternatives: staff storage with retrieval (on call or while she sat on a bench), staff delivery to her car, doorman folding/loading into the trunk, or parking in the indoor valet garage to leave the walker near the valet station.
- Vorchheimer provided doctors’ letters stating the walker was a medical necessity and that she should avoid unsupported standing; one doctor described independent retrieval as medically preferable but not mandatory.
- Vorchheimer sued under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B) (Fair Housing Amendments Act) claiming the lobby storage was necessary; the District Court dismissed for failure to plausibly plead necessity. Vorchheimer appealed; she later moved out.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the FHAA requires an accommodation to be "necessary" (and what that means) | "Necessary" is met because plaintiff needs immediate, independent access to her walker to enjoy her dwelling | "Necessary" means indispensable/required; alternatives that afford equal opportunity defeat a necessity claim | Court: "Necessary" is stringent: means essential/required and must be judged against offered alternatives |
| Whether alternatives offered by the landlord can be considered at the motion-to-dismiss stage | Alternatives are irrelevant; necessity is fact-intensive and cannot be dismissed pre-discovery | Because plaintiff pleaded and attached the specific alternatives, the court can consider them on dismissal | Court: Where plaintiff’s complaint itself includes and contradicts necessity (via exhibits), the alternatives may be considered and support dismissal |
| Whether Vorchheimer plausibly alleged that lobby storage was required to afford equal use and enjoyment | She needs independent retrieval to avoid unsupported standing and preserve functional independence | Offered alternatives (bench retrieval, call-ahead, staff delivery to car, doorman loading, valet parking) provide ready access and avoid unsupported standing | Court: Plaintiff did not plausibly plead necessity—alternatives on the face of the complaint met her medical needs |
| Whether amendment should have been permitted after dismissal | Plaintiff asserted needs in amended complaint; further amendment could cure defects | Defendants argued amendment was futile and plaintiff offered nothing further | Court: Leave to amend denied as plaintiff already amended and did not explain what more she could plead; further amendment would be futile |
Key Cases Cited
- Lapid-Laurel, L.L.C. v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 284 F.3d 442 (3d Cir.) (interprets "necessary" as "required" in FHAA context)
- Cinnamon Hills Youth Crisis Ctr. v. St. George City, 685 F.3d 917 (10th Cir.) ("necessary" means indispensable to achieving equal housing opportunity)
- Wis. Cmty. Servs., Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 465 F.3d 737 (7th Cir.) (frames necessity as a but-for causation test for equal opportunity)
- Anderson v. City of Blue Ash, 798 F.3d 338 (6th Cir.) (necessity requires more than mere help; links but-for causation to equal opportunity)
- Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 765 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir.) (upholding verdict where lack of requested accommodation would prevent plaintiff from functioning)
- Mayer v. Belichick, 605 F.3d 223 (3d Cir.) (district-court-document exhibits may be considered on a motion to dismiss)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. Supreme Court) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. Supreme Court) (established plausibility standard for federal complaints)