Full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Lower Court’s Holding in Garcia v. Brockway

“In a case that is being closely watched in the multi-family housing industry, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday released its opinion affirming the lower court’s holding that the 2-year statute of limitations for a private civil action alleging violation of the Fair Housing Act’s accessibility requirements for design and construction is triggered, i.e., the violation is complete, at the conclusion of the design and construction phase, which occurs on the date the last certificate of occupancy is issued.”

It seems that for the foreseeable future, accessibility claims under Fair Housing Act will be subject to a two year statute of limitations after all. This means that plaintiffs only have two years from the occupancy date to file a claim for such violations. This is quite favorable for developers, contractors and designers but may go against the intent of the Fair Housing Act, as illustrated by dissenting Circuit Court Judge, Hon. Judge Fisher:

“The majority erroneously treats a building’s improper design and construction as the event that triggers the Fair Housing Act’s (FHA) two-year statute of limitations. It does so by finding an ambiguity in the statute and then resolving that ambiguity contrary to the overall purpose and structure of the FHA and its legislative and judicial history.

“I believe instead that the most plausible reading of the statute is that the limitations period begins (at the earliest) when a disabled person actually experiences discrimination — either in attempting to buy or rent a noncompliant housing unit, in “testing” such a unit or upon moving in as a tenant.

In other words, Fisher feels that the two year statute should begin following discovery of such a violation. However the majority opinion from the Ninth Circuit felt that this two year statute should begin once the work is done. So what happens if a property is completed, but nobody moves in for two years? According to this decision, if there is a violation of the Fair Housing Act that creates a situation that is discriminatory, nothing happens at all.

Link to Article, Link to Post from Ninth Circuit Opinions Blog, Link to Opinion (PDF)

13 May 2008 | Construction, Construction Defect, Construction and Law, Design, Experts, General, Inspections, Litigation | Comments

Related entries:

  • Case Seen As ‘Groundbreaking’
  • Comments are closed.

    Search Steve Hill Construction Consulting, Inc.

    Navigation

    Pages

    Categories

    Archives


    Subscribe to the SHCC Calendar:



    Practical Solutions To Building Performance Issues