Fair Housing Justice Center, Inc. v. JDS Development LLC, 443 F.Supp.3d 494

Park Slope Building: 12-story, 51-unit rental in Brooklyn developed by JDS and PMG; opened 2011 and sold in 2013.
Fair Housing Justice Center (plaintiff) sent testers on August 29, 2018 who toured units and documented multiple accessibility defects (heavy entrance door without automatic opener, obstructed/too-high mailboxes, narrow interior doorways, high terrace thresholds, inaccessible environmental controls, inadequate kitchen/bathroom clearances).
Plaintiff sued on February 7, 2019 alleging violations of the FHA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL based on design-and-construction accessibility failures.
PMG moved to dismiss on statute-of-limitations grounds, arguing design/construction claims accrue when the last unit is sold or the final certificate of occupancy is issued (2013), making suit untimely.
The court rejected PMG’s accrual rule, holding FHA (and parallel state/local law) claims accrue when a protected person (including testers) encounters the inaccessible condition; HUD guidance, statutory text, tort accrual principles, and the FHA’s remedial purpose supported that result.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
When does the statute of limitations begin for FHA design-and-construction claims?	Accrual occurs when a protected person first experiences the discrimination (e.g., tester encounter); continuing violation until remedied.	Accrual occurs at end of design/construction phase—when last CO issued or last unit sold/occupied—so claims after that are time-barred.	Limitations period begins when an aggrieved person encounters the unlawful condition; Plaintiff’s Aug 29, 2018 tester visit made the FHA claim timely.
Do NYSHRL and NYCHRL accrual rules differ for design/construction claims?	Same accrual rule as FHA: claim accrues when the discriminatory act is experienced.	Same as FHA argument (accrual at sale/CO).	NYSHRL/NYCHRL accrual aligns with FHA; Plaintiff’s state and city claims were timely.

Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 U.S. 363 (1982) (recognizes testers and private "testers" standing under the FHA).
Garcia v. Brockway, 526 F.3d 456 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc) (holds accrual at completion of design/construction—last CO issuance; cited by defendant).
Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Ass'n v. Lazarus-Burman Assocs., 133 F. Supp. 2d 203 (E.D.N.Y. 2001) (treats inaccessible design/construction as a continuing violation accruing until remedied).
Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) (tort accrual principle: cause of action accrues when wrongful act results in damages).
Curtis v. Loether, 415 U.S. 189 (1974) (characterizes FHA damages actions as tort-like and informs accrual analysis).
Meyer v. Holley, 537 U.S. 280 (2003) (courts assume Congress incorporates ordinary tort rules into statutory causes of action).
TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U.S. 19 (2001) (statutory interpretation presumption against rendering statutory language superfluous).
United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218 (2001) (framework for deference to agency statutory interpretations).