Group Home on Gibson Island, LLC v. Gibson Island Corporation
23-2295
| 4th Cir. | Jul 15, 2025Background
- Craig Lussi, a Gibson Island homeowner with experience operating assisted living homes, sought to establish a group home for seniors with disabilities on Gibson Island, Maryland.
- The Gibson Island Corporation (the homeowners association) and community members strongly opposed Lussi's plan, citing both community character and enforcement of a business-purpose restrictive covenant.
- The Corporation offered to waive the covenant only if Lussi agreed to four specific conditions, which he viewed as unreasonable; negotiations broke down when Lussi refused.
- Litigation ensued: Lussi (via two LLCs) claimed violations of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and state law, alleging failure to reasonably accommodate, retaliation, and disability discrimination.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the Corporation, finding Lussi did not meet the "necessity" prong for accommodation and failed as a matter of law on retaliation/discrimination claims.
- The Fourth Circuit vacated summary judgment, held that genuine disputes of material fact remained, and remanded for jury trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation | Exemption from business-purpose covenant is reasonable and necessary for equal housing opportunity | Conditions imposed were necessary and removal not required for disabled housing access | District court erred; necessity met; reasonableness is a jury question |
| Retaliation under FHA | Corporation retaliated against Lussi for seeking FHA-protected rights | Adverse actions taken for legitimate reasons of covenant enforcement | Factual disputes over motive; for jury to decide |
| Disability Discrimination | Corporation's refusal/or conditions were pretext for disability-based exclusion | Actions served legitimate, non-discriminatory grounds (community/burden) | Sufficient evidence of potential pretext; for jury |
| Summary Judgment | Lussi entitled to judgment under undisputed facts | Corporation entitled based on record and law | Neither side entitled; factual disputes preclude summary judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Bryant Woods Inn, Inc. v. Howard County, 124 F.3d 597 (4th Cir. 1997) (sets out plaintiff's burden in FHA accommodation claims, including necessity and reasonableness)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (articulates summary judgment standard on sufficiency of factual disputes)
- Ballinger v. North Carolina Agric. Extension Serv., 815 F.2d 1001 (4th Cir. 1987) (jury is proper factfinder where motive/state of mind is at issue)
- Scoggins v. Lee's Crossing Homeowners Ass'n, 718 F.3d 262 (4th Cir. 2013) (details FHA accommodation standards and fact-specific nature of reasonableness)
- Texas Dep’t. of Cmty. Affs. v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (1981) (circumstantial evidence can prove discriminatory intent via showing pretext)