42 U.S.C. § 3601
Declaration of policy
It is the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing throughout the United States.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2,199
cases (576 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: Vill. of Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252 (1977).
Vill. of Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252 (1977). “MHDC, joined by other plaintiffs who are also respondents here, brought suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. [1] They alleged that the denial was racially discriminatory and that it violated, inter alia, the Fourteenth Amendment and the…”
Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health & Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598 (2001). “1619 , 42 U. S. C. § 3601 et seq., and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 104 Stat.”
Gladstone, Realtors v. Vill. of Bellwood, 441 U.S. 91 (1979). “81 , as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 3601 et seq., commonly known as the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (Act), broadly prohibits discrimination in housing throughout the Nation.”
Rachel Evans v. James T. Lynn v. The Town of New Castle, Appellee-Intervenor, 537 F.2d 571 (2d Cir. 1976). “, and Title VIII (Fair Housing) of the 1968 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. Title VI requires federal agencies affirmatively to effectuate its anti-discrimination policy in programs receiving federal financial assistance, 42 U.”
Wilkison v. City of Arapahoe, 302 Neb. 968 (Neb. 2019). “CONCLUSION In consideration of all the above, the district court erred in entering a declaratory judgment and enjoining Arapahoe from enforcing the ordinance as applied to Brooke. Arapahoe was not exempt by 42 U.”
Francis v. Kings Park Manor, Inc., 992 F.3d 67 (2d Cir. 2021). “2 The principal question presented to the en banc Court is whether a plaintiff states a claim under the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., and parallel state statutes for intentional discrimination by alleging that his landlord failed to respond to…”
Xiangyuan (Sue) Zhu v. Countrywide Realty, Co., 160 F. Supp. 2d 1210 (D. Kan. 2001). “She alleges that defendants made negligent and/or fraudulent representations during a residential real estate transaction and discriminated against her on the basis of sex and race in violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983.”
Graham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 101 P.3d 140 (Cal. 2005). “In Buckhannon , the plaintiffs sued alleging that certain state law requirements imposed on their assisted living facility violated the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 ( 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.) and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ( 42 U.”
City of Cuyahoga Falls v. Buckeye Cmty. Hope Found., 538 U.S. 188 (2003). “81 , as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 3601 et seq., by placing the petition on the ballot.”
Mhany Mgmt., Inc. v. Cnty. of Nassau, 819 F.3d 581 (2d Cir. 2016). “Plaintiffs asserted claims under the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., as well as 42 U.”
Selden Apts. v. United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 785 F.2d 152 (6th Cir. 1986). “Selden also appeals the jury verdict in favor of the United States Department of Urban Development (HUD) in the remain *154 der of Selden’s unfair housing action brought pursuant to Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, the Fair Housing Act ( 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.), and…”
Resident Advisory Bd. v. Rizzo, 425 F. Supp. 987 (E.D. Pa. 1976). “§ 2000d; Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., as well as the Fifth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”
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.