Manal Farhan v. 2715 NMA LLC (2025)

Citation: Manal Farhan v. 2715 NMA LLC (2025)
Parent Document: Manal Farhan v. 2715 NMA LLC (2025)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2025-12-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10747699/manal-farhan-v-2715-nma-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,521 chars

interest justification, even if there is no evidence the defend-
ant intended to discriminate. See Inclusive Communities, 576
U.S. at 539–41; see also Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp. v. Vill. of Arling-
ton Heights, 558 F.2d 1283, 1290 (7th Cir. 1977), on remand from
429 U.S. 252 (1977).
    Homeowners and renters also have post-acquisition pro-
tections under § 3617 of the FHA, which makes it “unlawful
to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any person in
the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having ex-
ercised or enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or en-
couraged any person in the exercise or enjoyment of” their
fair housing rights. 42 U.S.C. § 3617; Bloch, 587 F.3d at 781–82.
     A § 3617 discrimination claim requires a plaintiff to show
that: (1) she is a protected individual under the FHA; (2) she
was engaged in the exercise or enjoyment of her fair housing
rights; (3) the defendants coerced, threatened, intimidated, or
interfered with the plaintiff on account of her protected activ-
ity under the FHA; and (4) the defendants were motivated by
an intent to discriminate. Watters v. Homeowners’ Ass’n at Pre-
serve at Bridgewater, 48 F.4th 779, 786 (7th Cir. 2022) (citing
Bloch, 587 F.3d at 783). The coercion, intimidation, or interfer-
ence prohibited by § 3617 is more than just a one-time conflict;
it is a “pattern of harassment, invidiously motivated” that af-
fects the plaintiff’s right to remain in or enjoy her dwelling.
Bloch, 587 F.3d at 783 (citations omitted). 1

Other Sections in This Document (43)

Full Text