Dennis Heinert v. Wichita Falls Housing Authority
2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 8241
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- WFHA is a federally funded PHA providing low-income housing; Heinert, disabled per SSA, resided at WFHA since 2004 and was evicted in 2013 after a forcible detainer action.
- The 2009 lease – automatically renewed – prohibited conduct including criminal activity and threats to other residents or staff, with waivers under federal regulations for eviction for such conduct.
- Residents complained of Heinert’s escalating disruptive visits, intimidation, and unwanted intrusions into neighbors’ homes, including nighttime visits and attempts to enter locked doors.
- WFHA staff counseled Heinert, sought mental health resources, and obtained safety measures after threats and outbursts; Heinert left a threatening voicemail to the WFHA director.
- A district court granted eviction and awarded WFHA attorney’s fees; Heinert challenged on five points re terroristic threat and six points re reasonable accommodation; the court held eviction proper and not based on disability; the appellate court affirms.
- The court applied federal housing regulations allowing eviction for criminal activity and ruled the evidence supported a terroristic threat and failure to reasonably accommodate, then concluded the eviction was proper and not disability-based.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Heinert’s statements constituted a terroristic threat | Heinert argues no requisite intent | WFHA contends threats showed intent to place staff in fear | legally and factually sufficient to support terroristic threat |
| Whether there was a causal nexus between Heinert’s disability and eviction | Eviction based on disability with no nexus | Eviction based on lease violations, not disability | no causal link; eviction not based on disability |
| Whether WFHA properly considered a reasonable accommodation | WFHA failed to accommodate disability | Accommodation was unnecessary or not required given threats | proper standard applied; no nexus; eviction upheld on non-disability grounds |
| Whether eviction for criminal activity was permissible under federal regulation | Public housing leases require accommodation even with threats | Criminal activity justifies eviction under federal rules | eviction for criminal activity upheld under federal leases |
| Whether WFHA was obligated to make a reasonable accommodation in light of threats | Accommodation needed to avoid eviction | Threats not causally linked to disability; no accommodation required | no necessary nexus; accommodation not required where threats not disability-related |
Key Cases Cited
- Marshall v. Hous. Auth. of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782 (Tex. 2006) (public housing eviction standards; safe possession)
- Hinojosa v. Hous. Auth. of Laredo, 940 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997) (grounds for eviction; criminal activity evictions authorized)
- Cook v. State, 940 S.W.2d 344 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1997) (definition of threat; context matters in threats)
- Dues v. State, 634 S.W.2d 304 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1982) (intent to place fear of imminent harm; threat requires intent)