Section 213

Citation: Section 213
Parent Document: Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 2018-02-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241359/vermett-v-state/ ↗

Full Text

987 chars

As we have already found that Appellants engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice, we need not discuss this issue in depth. Under § 213.075.11(2), the MCHR may access a civil penalty of up to $2,000 in this case "for purposes of vindicating the public interest." While the MCHR does not give reasoning for why it concluded the maximum civil penalty was appropriate in this situation, we recognize that "[i]n most litigation, there is a large range between the damage extremes of inadequacy and excessiveness." Van Den Berk, 26 S.W.3d at 413. We find that, despite the MCHR penalizing Appellants the maximum amount, the penalty ordered here falls within the acceptable range because the MCHR likely was attempting to discourage Appellants (and others offering housing for rent or sale) from engaging in future discriminatory practices. This indeed vindicates the public interest, as it was ordered to prevent potential future housing discrimination against people with disabilities.

Other Sections in This Document (39)

Full Text