24 C.F.R. § 100.304

Housing for persons who are 55 years of age or older

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The provisions regarding familial status in this part shall not apply to housing intended and operated for persons 55 years of age or older. Housing qualifies for this exemption if:

(1) The alleged violation occurred before December 28, 1995 and the housing community or facility complied with the HUD regulations in effect at the time of the alleged violation; or

(2) The alleged violation occurred on or after December 28, 1995 and the housing community or facility complies with:

(i) Section 807(b)(2)(C) (42 U.S.C. 3607(b)) of the Fair Housing Act as amended; and

(ii) 24 CFR 100.305, 100.306, and 100.307.

(b) For purposes of this subpart, housing facility or community means any dwelling or group of dwelling units governed by a common set of rules, regulations or restrictions. A portion or portions of a single building shall not constitute a housing facility or community. Examples of a housing facility or community include, but are not limited to:

(1) A condominium association;

(2) A cooperative;

(3) A property governed by a homeowners' or resident association;

(4) A municipally zoned area;

(5) A leased property under common private ownership;

(6) A mobile home park; and

(7) A manufactured housing community.

[64 FR 16329, Apr. 2, 1999]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 17 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1990–2023 · leading case: United States v. City of Hayward, United States of Am. v. City of Hayward, 36 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. City of Hayward, United States of Am. v. City of Hayward, 36 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 1994). · cites it 3× “See 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (1993); see also 42 U.”

Sandra Hooker Richard Hooker & Fair Hous. Contact Serv. v. Terry Weathers Shamrock Motel & John Doe, 990 F.2d 913 (6th Cir. 1993). · cites it 3× “See 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 . In fact, there is no support for this defense except the unsubstantiated claims of the defendants.”

Covey v. Hollydale Mobilehome Estates, 116 F.3d 830 (9th Cir. 1997). · cites it 6× “at 43327 (amending 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (b)). 3 They also required the housing provider to “affirmatively demonstrate[ ] through credible and objective evidence that facilities and services specifically designed to meet the needs of older persons are ‘significant.”

Park Place Home Brokers v. PK Mobile Home Park, 773 F. Supp. 46 (N.D. Ohio 1991). · cites it 5× “§ 3607 (b)(2)(C) by issuing regulations at 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 . (a) The provisions regarding familial status shall not apply to housing intended and operated for occupancy by at least one person 55 years of age or older per unit, Provided That the housing satisfies the…”

Putnam Fam. P'ship v. CITY OF YUCAIPA, CAL., 673 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 3× “” 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (b). As non-exclusive examples, HUD listed a condominium association, a cooperative, property governed by a homeowners’ association, leased property under common private ownership, a mobile home park, a manufactured housing community, and, most notably for…”

Massaro v. Mainlands Section 1 & 2 Civic Ass'n, 796 F. Supp. 1499 (S.D. Fla. 1992). · cites it 6× “See 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (1990). Section 100.304(b)(1) provides that, [significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons’ include, but are not limited to, social and recreational *1502 programs, continuing education,…”

Seniors Civil Liberties Ass'n v. Kemp, 965 F.2d 1030 (11th Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “§ 3607 (b)(2), and the related regulatory framework, 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 , shows that the exemptions are reasonable and rational in the light of a legitimate governmental purpose — curing familial status discrimination — the Act violates no due process rights of the Riedels.”

Elaine Rogers, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellees v. Windmill Pointe Vill. Club Ass'n, Inc., Defendants-Cross-Claim-Plaintiffs-Appellants, 967 F.2d 525 (11th Cir. 1992). “24 C.F.R. § 100.304 . As stated above Defendants have the burden of proving that they fall within the exception provided in the Act.”

Balvage v. Ryderwood Improvement & Serv. Ass'n, 642 F.3d 765 (9th Cir. 2011). “[7] See 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (a) (explaining that "[h]ousing qualifies for this exemption if .”

Massaro v. Mainlands Section 1 & 2 Civic Ass'n, 3 F.3d 1472 (11th Cir. 1993). “According to 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (c)(2), there are six non-exclusive factors which are relevant to a determination under this part of the test: (i) The manner in which the housing facility is described to prospective residents.”

Lanier v. Fairfield Communities, Inc., 776 F. Supp. 1533 (M.D. Fla. 1990). “§ 3607 (b)(2)(C); 24 CFR § 100.304 (1989). Such housing is identified by three factors: 1.”

Colony Cove Assocs. v. Brown, 220 Cal. App. 3d 195 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “Appellants direct us to the Secretary of HUD’s development of regulations (see 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 ) which address the requirement of “significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons” or, alternatively, where such…”

Show all 17 citing cases →

— 24 C.F.R. § 100.304(c) — 1 case

United States v. Winters, 38 F.3d 1221 (10th Cir. 1994).

— 24 C.F.R. § 100.304(c)(2) — 1 case

Massaro v. Mainlands Section 1 & 2 Civic Ass'n, 796 F. Supp. 1499 (S.D. Fla. 1992). “See 24 C.F.R. § 100.304 (1990). Section 100.304(b)(1) provides that, [significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons’ include, but are not limited to, social and recreational *1502 programs, continuing education,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.