JUDGE VANCE FOUND THE PLAINTIFF FAILED TO PROVE SHE NEEDED A FEE WAIVER BECAUSE SHE DID NOT PUT FORWARD ANY EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WAIVING THE FEE WOULD ALLEVIATE THE EFFECTS OF HER DISABILITY.
Ultimately, Judge Vance found the plaintiff failed to prove she needed a fee waiver because she did not put forward any evidence to demonstrate that waiving the fee would alleviate the effects of her disability and the record showed the plaintiff could afford the fee, particularly if given the option to pay in installments.
Judge Vance also found the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact as to the reasonableness of her request considering the fee was:
A little under 3% of the total cost of the housing, Animal fees are relatively typical for leased apartment buildings in which animals are allowed, and The plaintiff failed to come forward with evidence about the importance of the animal fee to the defendants’ overall revenue.
HUD WITHDRAWS FAIR HOUSING GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS Following Judge Vance’s ruling, the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) withdrew the HUD Notice pursuant to Executive Order 14219 of February 19, 2025 (“Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Deregulatory Initiative.”) The HUD Withdrawal Notice explained that while guidance is a common tool for agencies to advise the public, it can sometimes be used by agencies
to attempt to bind the regulated public without adequate accountability. It also stated that, in some instances, guidance promulgated by the FHAO may have adopted interpretations that are inconsistent with statutory text. Thus, for the time being, the Withdrawal Notice instructs that the HUD Notice should not be enforced or relied upon by HUD or stakeholders.
PAGE 38
Powered by FlippingBook