DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

§ 290

Citation
§ 290
Parent Document
Francis v. Kings Park Manor, Inc., 992 F.3d 67 (2021)
Effective Date
2021-03-25
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4867798/francis-v-kings-park-manor-inc/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (993)

Full Text

998 chars 
25 Court-appointed amicus curiae Debo Adegbile suggests that we can infer
a discriminatory motive from KPM’s alleged departure from policy within a “larger
context of racial antagonism.” Adegbile Br. at 42-43. This argument is unavailing.
The Complaint alleges no details regarding the KPM Defendants’ actions in
comparable circumstances, nor does it otherwise support the inference that a
relevant “policy” existed, much less that the KPM Defendants departed from it. In
the cases Adegbile cites, the actors who created the “context of racial antagonism”
could be reasonably presumed to have substantial influence over the party charged
with discrimination. See, e.g., Mhany Mgmt., Inc. v. Cnty. of Nassau, 819 F.3d 581, 612
(2d Cir. 2016) (housing board discriminated by knowingly “acquiesc[ing] to race-
based citizen opposition” to affordable housing). By contrast, Francis’s Complaint
provides no factual basis to suggest, much less show, that Endres had any influence
over the KPM Defendants.