Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Associates, 250 Conn. 763 (1999)

Citation: Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Associates, 250 Conn. 763 (1999)
Parent Document: Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Associates, 250 Conn. 763 (1999)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 1999-10-12
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7898215/commission-on-human-rights-oppo... ↗

Full Text

928 chars

Patricia Hanson and Patricia Roper (the relators) filed separate complaints with the plaintiff in each case, the commission on human rights and opportunities (commission), alleging that the defendant in each case, Sullivan Associates, had violated § 46a-64c by refusing rentals to the relators because they expected to pay for their housing using their lawful source of income, namely, housing assistance from the state section 8 program. The commission filed petitions in the Housing Session of the Superior Court on behalf of the relators.3 The defendant, denying that it had discriminated against the relators, alleged that its refusal to rent was based on its uniform policy of insisting on the terms of its *766own standard lease and its own standard income requirements. In addition, by way of special defense, the defendant raised constitutional objections to § 46a-64c if it were applied as construed by the commission.4

Other Sections in This Document (133)

Full Text