STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

LINDA HURD, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 97-3375

)

EDWARD L. KEOHANE, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Robert E. Meale, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, conducted the final hearing in Fort Myers, Florida, on October 6, 1997.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Linda Hurd, pro se

16 Circle Drive

Fort Myers, Florida 33908

For Respondent: Terrence F. Lenick

Terence F. Lenick, P.A. 12699 New Brittany Boulevard Fort Myers, Florida 33907

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is whether Respondent is guilty of a discriminatory housing practice based on physical handicap, in violation of the Fair Housing Act, Sections 760.20-760.37, Florida Statutes.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On March 3, 1997, the Florida Commission on Human Relations entered a Determination of No Reasonable Cause concerning Petitioner’s complaints against Respondent. In her Petition for Relief, Petitioner alleged that she resides in a mobile home park owned and operated by Respondent. The petition alleges that Respondent took various actions against Petitioner because she was handicapped physically.

By Response to Petition for Relief from a Discriminatory Housing Practice, Respondent denied the material allegations.

At the hearing, Petitioner called three witnesses and offered into evidence 12 exhibits. Respondent called three witnesses and offered into evidence 27 exhibits. All exhibits were admitted.

The parties did not order a transcript.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent owns and operates McGregor Mobile Home Park in Fort Myers. His wife serves as the office manager.

2. In February 1995, Petitioner met with Respondent and his wife to discuss leasing or purchasing a mobile home at the park. The following month, Petitioner leased a mobile home with an option to purchase. In March 1996, Petitioner purchased the mobile home. At all material times, Petitioner has rented from Respondent a mobile home lot at McGregor Mobile Home Park.

3. Within two months of purchasing the mobile home, Petitioner filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The complaint concerned Respondent’s attempt to charge her for an extra person residing in Petitioner’s mobile home. Respondent claimed that she required the person for physical assistance.

4. In May 1996, Petitioner had a fence built around her mobile home lot. She did not obtain a building permit or the permission of Respondent, as was required under the rules of the park. Four to six weeks later, Petitioner had a deck built, again without a building permit or the permission of Respondent.

5. At the time of the construction of the fence and deck, Petitioner had complained to local media about conditions at the park. A local television station broadcast a story about the park.

6. The Lee County building department inspected the park and, on July 15, 1996, cited Respondent for a number of violations for, among other things, Petitioner’s fence and deck. Respondent’s wife immediately told Petitioner to remove these items.

7. The disputes between Petitioner and Respondent seem to involve nothing more than disputes between a mobile home park operator and a park resident.

8. Petitioner produced no credible evidence of discrimination against her on any basis. It does not appear that Respondent treated her any differently than he has treated other park residents.

9. Petitioner also produced no credible evidence of discrimination against her on the basis of physical handicap. Approximately half of the park residents are handicapped. Also, the nature of Petitioner’s handicap is not well defined. At the hearing, she walked with a cane and limped noticeably. However, in the nearly three years that she has resided at the park, she has never used a wheelchair and very rarely used a cane.

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

10. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter. Sections 120.57(1) and 760.34(4), Florida Statutes. (All references to Sections are to Florida Statutes.)

11. Section 760.34(5) provides that Petitioner bears the burden of proof.

12. Section 760.23(2) states that it is

    
    

    unlawful to discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, national origin, sex, handicap, familial status, or religion.

13. Section 760.22(4) defines “dwelling” as

    any building or structure, or portion thereof, which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more families, and any vacant land which is offered for sale or lease for the construction or location on the land of any such building or structure, or portion thereof.

14. The mobile home lot evidently qualifies as a “dwelling” due to the last clause of the statutory definition. However, Petitioner has not proved that Respondent has treated her any differently due to physical handicap.

RECOMMENDATION

It is

RECOMMENDED that the Florida Commission on Human Relations enter a final order dismissing Petitioner’s Petition for Relief.

DONE AND ENTERED this 22nd day of December, 1997, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

ROBERT E. MEALE

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

Fax Filing (850) 921-6847

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of December, 1997.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Linda Hurd

16 Circle Drive

Fort Myers, Florida 33908

Terrence F. Lenick Terence F. Lenick, P.A.

12699 New Brittany Boulevard Fort Myers, Florida 33907

Sharon Moultry, Clerk

Florida Commission on Human Relations Building F, Suite 240

325 John Knox Road

Tallahassee, Florida 32303-4149

Dana Baird

Florida Commission on Human Relations

Building F, Suite 240

325 John Knox Road

Tallahassee, Florida 32303-4149

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

15 days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions to this recommended order must be filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.

Docket for Case No: 97-003375

Orders for Case No: 97-003375