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
1,627 charsAs to the process by which a purportedly reasonable accommodation is reached, we have stated, in the employment context, that “it is the employee’s initial request for an accommodation which triggers the employer’s obligation to participate in [an] interactive process of determining one.” Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. v. Massachusetts Comm’n Against Discrimination, 441 Mass. 632, 644 (2004), quoting Russell v. Cooley Dickinson Hosp., Inc., 437 Mass. 443, 457 (2002). “Once a qualified individual with a disability has requested provision of a reasonable accommodation, the employer must make a reasonable effort to determine the appropriate accommodation . . . through a flexible, interactive process that involves both the employer and the qualified individual with a disability.” 29 C.F.R. § 1630 App. (2004). Unlike the employment context, however, there is no language in the Fair Housing Act, or the relevant sections of the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. §§ 100.200-100.205 (2004), that imposes an obligation on landlords and tenants to engage in an interactive process for reaching appropriate reasonable accommodations. See Lapid-Laurel, L.L.C. v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment of Scotch Plains, 284 F.3d 442, 455-456 (3d Cir. 2002); Groner v. Golden Gate Gardens Apartments, supra at 1047. Nonetheless, such a process is the optimal way for a landlord and tenant to explore the scope of the tenant’s alleged handicap as well as the availability and feasibility of various *309accommodations.14 See Jankowski Lee & Assocs. v. Cisneros, 91 F.3d 891, 895 (7th Cir. 1996).