Woman With Service Animal Sues Willimantic Housing Complex Over No-Pet Policy
Tenant Yarieliz Moure has filed a lawsuit against property managers of the Windham Heights housing complex, alleging they've tried to force her to keep her assistance dog off the premises. Moure, who says she needs the dog to help with mental and emotional disabilities, is seeking $150,000 in compensatory damages.
May 21, 2019 at 05:20 PM
3 minute read
Claiming a Willimantic-based public housing complex had repeatedly refused to accommodate her request to have an assistance animal to support her mental and emotional disabilities, a resident has sued the complex.
In her lawsuit, filed Monday with the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, 24-year-old Yarieliz Moure has sued Vesta Corp. and Vesta Windham LLC, which own the Windham Heights housing complex. She also lists Ashley Johnson, director of compliance for Vesta Corp., as a defendant.
Moure, who says she suffers from anxiety and depression, said she purchased the dog in May 2016 on the advice and consultation from doctors, who told her the animal would help alleviate her symptoms.
The lawsuit, however, states the housing complex, which has a no-pet policy, has “refused, despite an administrative appeal hearing and repeated written requests, to provide” Moure with a reasonable accommodation for her assistance dog.
Moure, in the suit, alleges the defendants intentionally discriminated against her on the basis of her disabilities, in violation of the Fair Housing Amendments Act.
“Ms. Moure has endured and will continue to endure needless pain and suffering due to defendants' action,” the suit continues.
Moure leased a two-bedroom apartment in October 2018 and was provided with the complex's no-pet policy disclaimer. At about that same time though, she also completed Vesta Corp.'s form to request the accommodation, and delivered it to her doctor for further completion, according to her lawsuit.
But less than a month later, the company threatened to evict Moure if she did not remove her dog from the premises, her complaint alleges. Soon after the company contacted Moure, her doctor wrote that she suffered from mental and physical ailments, including risk to her pregnancy, due to the threat of losing her dog and her possible eviction.
On Nov. 23, 2018, 10 days after Moure's doctor wrote the letter saying the tenant needed the dog, Vesta Corp. denied the request for not being a “medical necessity,” according to the lawsuit.
And then in December, the companies conducted an administrative appeal proceeding on the matter. While the property managers have taken no further actions to evict Moure since late last year, they have also not signed off on her keeping the dog in the apartment.
The lawsuit claims management violated the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits companies or programs that receive federal financial assistance from discriminating against people with disabilities.
At press time, the defendants had not assigned an attorney to the case, and no one answered the phone at the businesses. In addition, neither defendant Johnson, nor Jennifer Moran, president of property operations, responded to a request for comment.
Representing Moure are Nilda Havrilla, Natalia Planell, and Obinna Anugweje, all with Connecticut Legal Services. All three attorneys declined to comment for this report.
The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that the defendants violated both the Fair Housing Amendments Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. It also seeks compensatory damages of $150,000 and punitive damages.
Judge Alfred Covello is scheduled to hear the case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250