Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Cmty., LLC, 901 F.3d 856 (2018)

Citation
Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Cmty., LLC, 901 F.3d 856 (2018)
Parent Document
Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Cmty., LLC, 901 F.3d 856 (2018)
Effective Date
2018-08-27

Other Sections in This Document (38)

Full Text

907 chars
Much of what the Court said in Davis can be applied readily to the housing situation. In Davis , the fund recipient's own misconduct subjected the student to actionable sex-based harassment. Here, we need look only to the management defendants themselves, asking whether they had actual knowledge of the severe harassment Wetzel was enduring and whether they were deliberately indifferent to it. If so, they subjected Wetzel to conduct that the FHA forbids. (We say nothing about the situation in a setting that more closely resembles custodial care, such as a skilled nursing facility, or an assisted living environment, or a hospital. Any of those are different enough that they should be saved for another day.) Wetzel may be in unchartered territory, but the Supreme Court's interpretation of analogous anti-discrimination statutes satisfies us that her claim against St. Andrew is covered by the Act. D