O.C.G.A. § 8-3-204 (2019)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Insurance coverage. - Insurer was not required to defend its insureds in a race discrimination suit filed by potential property buyers who alleged that the

insureds violated the Georgia Fair Housing Law, O.C.G.A. § 8-3-200 et seq., by refusing to sell them a lot in a subdivision because they were a bi-racial

couple; the bodily injury provision of the commercial general liability policy did not provide coverage because the buyers did not allege that the buyers were physically injured by the insureds’ actions, and the policy’s personal injury provision, which applied to personal injuries sustained when a right of occupancy was invaded, did not provide coverage because the buyers were not present occupants of the land at issue. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Robinson, No. 3:05-CV-109, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66551 (M.D. Ga. Sept. 6, 2006). Disparate impact claim. - Since the defendants allegedly violated the Georgia Fair Housing Act, O.C.G.A. § 8-3-200 et seq., by discriminating against the plaintiff in renegotiating the terms of the plaintiff’s residential mortgage, the evidence could be presented to establish a claim of disparate impact because the plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff was disabled, that the plaintiff’s disability prevented the plaintiff from capably negotiating a modification of the plaintiff’s

residential loan, and that the defendants’ policy of refusing to negotiate with any third parties prevented the plaintiff from using legal counsel to accommodate for the plaintiff’s disability, thereby harming the plaintiff in the plaintiff’s efforts to modify the plaintiff’s loan. Renasant Corporation v. Korst, 361 Ga. App. 794, 865 S.E.2d 606, 2021 Ga. App. LEXIS 547 (2021). Prima facie case. - Unpublished decision: Affidavits of three African-Americans, and plaintiff African-American homeowner’s own testimony, that defendant mortgage loan servicer treated them unfairly by adding inappropriate fees, refusing requests for information, and improperly foreclosing, but that revealed nothing about the proportion of loans serviced for those of other races did not establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on race under 42 U.S.C. § 3605 and O.C.G.A. § 8-3-204. Steed v. Everhome Mortg. Co., 477 Fed. Appx. 722, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 14150 (11th Cir. 2012).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Assistance animals qualifying as reasonable accommodation under Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 3604(f), 66 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 209. Application of Clayton Act or Sherman Act to Merger or Acquisition of Television, Radio, News, or Internet Media Company, 38 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 7. Contempt and Arrest Proceedings Resulting from Statutory Turnover Obligations in Bankruptcy - 21st Century Cases, 38 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 10. Housing Subsidy as Reasonable Accommodation Under Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 3604(f), 38 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 12. Whether Alleged Violation of Section 10(b) of Securities Exchange Act Was Primarily Omission or Misrepresentation of

Fact for Purposes of Presumption of Investor’s Reliance Under Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States, 43 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 3. Relief from Zoning or Other Land Use Restrictions as Reasonable Accommodation Under Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 3604(f), 43 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 5. Actions under Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 3604, 3617), Based on Harassment or Creation of Hostile Environment with Respect to Race or National Origin, 47 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 3. Protected Activity under Retaliation Provision of Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 3617), 47 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 4. U.S. Supreme Court’s Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Decisions and Holdings, 48 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 4.