Filed: Jul. 13, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 13, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 07-30181 Summary Calendar CLIFTON J BONVILLIAN III, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS LAWLER-WOOD HOUSING, LLC; LAWLER-WOOD, LLC; TIVOLI GP, LLC; TIVOLI II, LLC., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (2:05-CV-5193) Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* App
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 13, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 07-30181 Summary Calendar CLIFTON J BONVILLIAN III, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS LAWLER-WOOD HOUSING, LLC; LAWLER-WOOD, LLC; TIVOLI GP, LLC; TIVOLI II, LLC., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (2:05-CV-5193) Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appe..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 13, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 07-30181
Summary Calendar
CLIFTON J BONVILLIAN III,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
LAWLER-WOOD HOUSING, LLC; LAWLER-WOOD, LLC; TIVOLI GP, LLC;
TIVOLI II, LLC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
(2:05-CV-5193)
Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant Clifton J. Bonvillian, III appeals the district
court’s order granting partial summary judgment to defendants-
appellees, and dismissing his other claims without prejudice.
Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and damages against the
defendants, who are the owners and operators of an apartment
building, for alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”),
42 U.S.C. § 3604, and Louisiana law.
*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R.
47.5.4.
The substance of the Plaintiffs’ claim under the FHA is that
the defendants’ decision to close the apartment building following
Hurricane Katrina had a disparate impact on the disabled and
elderly, and on racial minorities, because a majority of the
residents apparently fall within these protected categories. See
Simms v. First Gibralter Bank,
83 F.3d 1546, 1555 (5th Cir. 1996)
(holding that proof of a significant discriminatory effect is
sufficient to establish a violation of the FHA).
However, as the district court noted, the building is closed
to all potential tenants. In other words, members of classes
protected under the FHA are being treated the same as everyone
else. Therefore, all tenants were equally affected by the closure
and there is no “significantly greater discriminatory impact on
members of a protected class.”
Id.
For the foregoing reasons, and those stated by the district court
in its Order and Reasons, we AFFIRM.
AFFIRMED.
2