Douglas v. Kriegsfeld Corp., 884 A.2d 1109 (2005)

Citation: Douglas v. Kriegsfeld Corp., 884 A.2d 1109 (2005)
Parent Document: Douglas v. Kriegsfeld Corp., 884 A.2d 1109 (2005)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 2005-10-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1472683/douglas-v-kriegsfeld-corp/ ↗

Full Text

1,092 chars

In the other case on which our colleague relies, Arnold, Murray Construction, L.L.C. v. Hicks,76 the Supreme Court of South Dakota sustained a trial court judgment of possession, rejecting a reasonable accommodation defense proffered by a tenant who was accosting others in his building with “emotional outbursts, verbal threats, nude appearance and other offensive conduct.”77 There, the court accepted the line of authority confirming that “Congress intended for landlords to attempt reasonable accommodations, even when the tenant is a direct threat to the health and safety of other tenants, if those accommodations will eliminate or acceptably minimize the risks posed by that tenant.”78 But the court concluded that the accommodations requested by the tenant dealt only with “parking” and “controlled access door issues,” not at all with his threats and other offensive conduct79 — a situation entirely different from the present case, in which the tenant’s proffered accommodation, if successfully implemented, would eliminate the threat to health and safety from an unclean apartment.

Other Sections in This Document (533)

Full Text