Castillo Condominium Ass'n v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development
821 F.3d 92
| 1st Cir. | 2016Background
- Resident Carlo Giménez, who suffers from anxiety and chronic depression, kept an emotional support dog despite the Castillo Condominium Association’s “no pets” bylaw; the Association threatened fines and would not grant an accommodation.
- Giménez filed a HUD disability-discrimination complaint; HUD found reasonable cause and charged the Association under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) for refusing a reasonable accommodation.
- An ALJ held after a four-day hearing that Giménez failed to prove a disability and recommended against liability; the Secretary of HUD reviewed, reversed the ALJ, found liability, and remanded for remedies.
- On remand, the ALJ recommended modest damages and a penalty; the Secretary increased emotional-distress damages to $20,000, imposed the maximum $16,000 civil penalty, and ordered ancillary relief (training, policy changes).
- The Association petitioned for judicial review; HUD cross-petitioned for enforcement. The First Circuit denied review and enforced the Secretary’s order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Association unlawfully denied a reasonable accommodation under the FHA | Giménez: he has a disability; the emotional support dog was necessary; Association refused accommodation, making his housing unavailable | Association: no cognizable disability proved; accommodation not warranted | Court: substantial evidence supports Secretary that Giménez is disabled and denial was unlawful; FHA violation upheld |
| Standard of review when Secretary overturns ALJ factual findings | Giménez: Secretary’s factual reversal is entitled to deference | Association: ALJ credibility findings should control; Secretary overstepped | Court: adopts heightened scrutiny — Secretary must articulate reasons for overturning ALJ and those reasons must be supported by record; Secretary met that standard |
| Preclusive effect of prior DACO administrative decision (res judicata) | Association: DACO’s ruling upholding the bylaw should preclude HUD charge | HUD/Giménez: DACO only addressed bylaw validity under Puerto Rico law, not federal discrimination claims | Court: res judicata inapplicable — DACO and HUD actions lack identity of thing and cause |
| Admissibility of Dr. Fernández’s expert testimony | Association: move to exclude treating psychiatrist’s testimony and report | HUD/Giménez: treating psychiatrist is qualified and testimony is highly probative | Court: challenge waived on appeal; in any event ALJ/agency acted within discretion to admit the expert testimony |
Key Cases Cited
- Astralis Condo. Ass'n v. Sec'y of HUD, 620 F.3d 62 (1st Cir.) (framework for FHA reasonable-accommodation claim)
- Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474 (substantial-evidence standard for agency factfinding)
- Aylett v. Sec'y of HUD, 54 F.3d 1560 (10th Cir.) (requirement that agency articulate reasons when overruling ALJ)
- Olsen v. Stark Homes, Inc., 759 F.3d 140 (2d Cir.) (competence of a claimant’s testimony about depression)
- Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 765 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir.) (respect given to HUD/DOJ Joint Statement on reasonable accommodations)
- United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.) (perfunctory appellate arguments are waived)