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

1,019 chars

The nub of this case is thus the fourth element of a prima facie defense of reasonable accommodation, namely, the reasonableness of the accommodation the tenant proposed. There was no question in the landlord's  or the court's  mind that the tenant, in requesting a "reasonable *1134 accommodation," meant a stay of the eviction proceeding for the period reasonably required for the D.C. government to clean up the apartment and for the tenant then to demonstrate, through the continuing help of the D.C. government, that she would keep it clean. Furthermore, no one disputes that a clean apartment would erase the legal justification for the notice to cure or quit and thus would cure  albeit belatedly  the tenant's default.[56] The landlord takes the position, however, that the tenant has not carried out her responsibility to make a precise enough request to allow the trial court  and ultimately a jury  to find that the accommodation she sought was "reasonable" under the Fair Housing Act. We cannot agree.

Other Sections in This Document (533)

Full Text