Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Citation
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Parent Document
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-01-14
Other Sections in This Document (43)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
- Andover Housing Authority v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300 (2005)
Full Text
2,183 chars“A ‘reasonable accommodation’ is one which would not impose an undue hardship or burden on the entity making the accommodation.” Peabody Props., Inc. v. Sherman, 418 Mass. 603, 608 (1994) (reasonable accommodation of tenant’s handicap under Fair Housing Act did not preclude landlord from evicting tenant for drug activity on premises). See Rakuz v. Spunt, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 171, 176 (1995). See also G. L. c. 151B, § 4 (7A). The mandate for reasonable, but not onerous, accommodations strikes “a balance between the statutory rights of the handicapped . . . and the legitimate interests of federal grantees in preserving the integrity of their programs.” City Wide Assocs. v. Penfield, 409 Mass. 140, 142 (1991), quoting Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287, 300 (1985). The determination whether a requested accommodation is reasonable is fact specific and will be resolved on a case-by-case basis. See Groner v. Golden Gate Gardens Apartments, 250 F.3d 1039, 1044 (6th Cir. 2001); United States v. California Mobile Home Park Mgt. Co., 29 F.3d 1413, 1418 (9th Cir. 1994). A tenant who has alleged discrimination based on a landlord’s failure reasonably to accommodate a handicap has the burden of proving that the proposed accommodation is reasonable. See Groner v. Golden Gate Gardens Apartments, supra at 1044-1045. See also Loren v. Sasser, 309 F.3d 1296, 1302 (11th Cir. 2002), cert. denied sub nom. Newbold v. Sasser, 538 U.S. 930 (2003), and *308cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1057 (2003); Bryant Woods Inn, Inc. v. Howard County, 124 F.3d 597, 603-604 (4th Cir. 1997); Elderhaven, Inc. v. Lubbock, 98 F.3d 175, 178 (5th Cir. 1996). Cf. City Wide Assocs. v. Penfield, supra at 143 (“As with any other discrimination claim, the burden is on the tenant to prove a prima facie case of discrimination”). Contrast Hovsons, Inc. v. Brick, 89 F.3d 1096, 1103 (3d Cir. 1996) (burden on defendant township to prove that proposed accommodation not reasonable). “The text of the Fair Housing Act provides no hint that Congress sought to change the normal rule that a plaintiff bears the burden of proving a violation of law by a preponderance of the evidence.” Elderhaven, Inc. v. Lubbock, supra.