Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)

Citation
Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
Parent Document
Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
Effective Date
2018-03-01

Other Sections in This Document (36)

Full Text

1,264 chars
B. Procedural Background
    On December 22, 2016, plaintiffs filed a complaint in the
United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois.
Plaintiffs alleged the City discriminated against the Noble
home residents on the basis of their disabilities, in violation of
the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601–31, Ameri-
cans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–213,
and § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794(a).
In addition to monetary damages, plaintiffs sought an order
directing the City to grant their requested CPU and perma-
nently refrain from treating the Noble home as a non-con-
forming use under the Code.
    Plaintiffs’ raised multiple theories of liability. First, they
claimed the Code facially discriminates against disabled indi-
viduals because it imposes a 600-foot spacing requirement on
unrelated disabled persons living in family care residences,
but not on unrelated non-disabled persons living in single-
family dwellings.4 Second, they argued that even if the 600-
foot spacing requirement is facially neutral, it has a disparate
impact on persons with disabilities. Third, they claimed that
by refusing to grant the Noble home a CPU, the City failed to
make a reasonable accommodation.