Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:1

1
2
3
4
5

Margaret A. Elder (SBN 177424)
Chandra Gehri Spencer (SBN 184010)
ELDER & SPENCER, LLP
17011 Beach Bd., Suite 900
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
Tel: (213) 631-8331
Fax: (888) 422-8027
E-mail: info@elderspencer.com

6
7

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

ALEJANDRA MOYOTL, an individual;
and FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, a California
nonprofit corporation,

)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
TAHQUITZ COURT APARTMENTS, an )
unknown business entity doing business in )
California; and TAHQUITZ
)
ASSOCIATES, LP,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)

Case No:
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND
DAMAGES FOR VIOLATIONS OF:
1.
2.

3.

The Fair Housing Amendments Act
of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.;
California Fair Employment and
Housing Act, Cal. Gov’t Code §
12955 et seq.; and
Negligence

24
I.

25
26
27
28

1.

INTRODUCTION

This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief and damages against

TAHQUITZ COURT APARTMENTS and TAHQUITZ ASSOCIATES, LP, for
discrimination based on familial status and breach of the warranty of habitability in
COMPLAINT
-1-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 2 of 11 Page ID #:2

1

connection with the rental of residential property. Defendants and their employees and

2

agents have engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct with the purpose and the effect

3

of discriminating against families with minor children by, among other things,

4

discriminating in the terms and privileges of a rental because of a person’s familial

5

status and otherwise making unavailable or denying a dwelling because of a person’s

6

familial status. This action arises under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, as amended, 42

7

U.S.C. §3601 et seq., related state laws, and California Civil Code §1941 et seq.

8
9

II.
2.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

The jurisdiction of this Court over the subject matter of this action is

10

predicated on 28 U.S.C. § 1331 in that the claims alleged herein arise under the laws of

11

the United States, specifically the federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619

12

(“FHA”). The state law claims form the same case and controversy as the federal law

13

claims. Thus, this Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 to

14

hear and determine Plaintiffs’ state law claims.

15

3.

Defendants reside in this district and all events giving rise to this complaint

16

occurred in this district. Thus venue is proper in the Central District of California under

17

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2).

18

4.

This Court has authority to grant declaratory and injunctive relief as well

19

as actual and punitive damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3612(o)(3), and 42 U.S.C. §

20

3613(c)(1).

21

attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3613(c)(2).

22
23

The Court also has the authority to award Plaintiffs their reasonable

III.
5.

PARTIES

At all times relevant herein Defendant Tahquitz Court Apartments

24

operating as a business entity, type unknown to Plaintiffs, was and is the owner,

25

developer, and manager of a multi-family residential property (“subject property”) of

26

more than 5 units, located at 2890 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California

27

92262.

28
COMPLAINT
-2-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 3 of 11 Page ID #:3

1

6.

Defendant TAHQUITZ ASSOCIATES, LP, is an unknown business entity

2

doing business in California as a residential rental property landlord and management

3

company and is responsible for the property located at 2890 Tahquitz Canyon Way,

4

Palm Springs, California.

5

7.

Plaintiff Alejandra Moyotl was a tenant at the subject property from April

6

20, 2013, to approximately March 2015. Ms. Moyotl resided at the subject property

7

with her four minor children ages 15 years, 14 years, 11 years and 9 years.

8
9
10

8.

Plaintiff Fair Housing Council of Riverside County (“FHC”) is a private

non-profit organization organized under the laws of the State of California with its
principal place of business at 3933 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside, California 92501.

11

IV.

12
13

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A.

9.

Introduction

Defendants, acting individually or in concert, directly or through agents,

14

have engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on familial status in the

15

operation of the subject property. Defendants continue to engage in such a pattern or

16

practice of discrimination so as to constitute a continuing violation.

17
18
19

10.

Defendants’ unlawful conduct includes, but is not limited to, commission

of the following discriminatory housing practices:
a.

Imposing differential terms, treatment, conditions, or privileges

20

associated with a rental unit on prospective tenants because of

21

familial status; and

22

b.

23
24

Otherwise making unavailable or denying a dwelling to any person
because of familial status.

c.

Making, printing or publishing advertisement or statements that

25

indicate a preference or designed to dissuade a potential renter based

26

on familial status 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c).

27
28
COMPLAINT
-3-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 4 of 11 Page ID #:4

1

11.

Defendants have negligently failed to hire, train, supervise, and discipline

2

its agents and employees, and itself, to conform its operation of the subject property to

3

the standard of care for the multi-family residential housing industry.

4

12.

Upon information and belief, Defendants continue to engage in rental

5

practices that discriminate against, and provide differential treatment to families with

6

children, so as to constitute a continuing violation of the federal Fair Housing Act and

7

the State of California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

8
9

C.
13.

Discrimination Based on Familial Status

Defendants through their agents established rules prohibiting children from

10

being outside without parental supervision and enforced a curfew requiring children, bit

11

not adults, to be inside by a certain hour. The illegal rules were conveyed to Plaintiffs.

12

Several incidents occurred when Defendants attempted to enforce the illegal rules.

13

14.

In a memorandum served on Ms. Moyotl and her family, the property

14

manager stated: “This will be my final notice to all tenants, you will not receive any

15

further verbal or written notice if any of the following rules are broken one last time …”

16

The following paragraph stated: “1.

17

WITHOUT parental supervision.”

18
19
20

15.

Children are NOT allowed to be outside

Shortly after the final notice, on or about February 5, 2014, Ms. Moyotl

and her family were served with a thirty day notice to vacate the premises.
16.

On or about May 6, 2014, a security guard cited two of Ms. Moyotl’s

21

children for being out past curfew. The security guard informed Ms. Moyotl that there

22

was a curfew for children at the property and that her children were required to comply

23

with the curfew. This citation was one of many warnings given by Defendants and their

24

agents and employees to enforce discriminatory rules.

25
26
27

17.

Ms. Moyotl and her family were forced to move as a result of Defendants’

insistence upon enforcing discriminatory rules.
C.

FHC’s Standing

28
COMPLAINT
-4-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 5 of 11 Page ID #:5

1

18.

The FHC is a private non-profit organization that actively supports and

2

promotes fair housing through education and advocacy. Its mission is to ensure that all

3

persons have the opportunity to secure the housing they desire and can afford, without

4

discrimination based on their race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national

5

origin, familial status, marital status, disability, ancestry, age, source of income, or other

6

characteristics protected by law.

7

discriminatory housing practices. Among other things, the FHC’s activities include: (1)

8

outreach and educate the community regarding fair housing; (2) investigating

9

allegations of discrimination; (3) conducting tests of housing facilities to determine

10

whether freedom of residence and equal opportunity are provided; and (4) taking other

11

necessary steps to ensure equal housing opportunities and eliminate discriminatory

12

housing practices.

13

19.

The FHC works to counteract and eliminate

The FHC is contracted by the City of Riverside to comply with funding

14

requirements for Community Development Block Grant funds the City receives through

15

the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

16

contract requires the FHC to counteract and eliminate discriminatory housing practices

17

through whatever means necessary as outlined above.

18

include interviewing potential victims of discrimination, analyzing housing-related

19

issues, conducting mediation, litigation or referral to administrative enforcement

20

agencies, and disseminating information about fair housing laws. All activities must

21

address housing discrimination on at least one of the following bases: race, color,

22

religion, sex, disability, familial status, and national origin. Failure to complete the

23

activities set forth in the contract with the City may result in the termination of the grant

24

agreement and/or negatively impact FHC’s ability to receive CDBG funding the next

25

grant year.

26
27

20.

The CDBG

These counteract activities

In accordance with the CDBG contract, the FHC conducts investigations at

residential properties throughout the City and County of Riverside. Sometimes these

28
COMPLAINT
-5-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 6 of 11 Page ID #:6

1

tests are conducted in response to a complaint or when the FHC, on its own, discovers

2

evidence that indicates an unlawful preference for certain groups of individuals.

3

21.

The additional investigation, time, and resources spent at the subject

4

properties the FHC would not have otherwise spent inflicted an “injury in fact” on the

5

FHC. The FHC was forced to divert scarce resources from other activities not funded

6

under the CDBG grant and pay expenses out-of-pocket for the additional investigations

7

and outreach to redress the discrimination and its impact on the community. These

8

resources came from areas committed to investigating other forms of discrimination and

9

conducting outreach and education unrelated to redressing defendants’ discrimination.

10

Due to defendants’ discriminatory acts, the FHC diverted resources away from opening

11

an office in Murrietta to set up and conduct presentations and workshops with residents

12

in that area. Moreover, the additional investigation that the FHC conducted constituted

13

lost opportunities under the CDBG contract to investigate other properties and other

14

forms of discrimination in the County of Riverside.

15

22.

Furthermore, the FHC’s mission was frustrated when it was forced to

16

undertake additional targeted outreach and education to counteract the impact of

17

housing discrimination on the local housing market. As described in Section V below,

18

because the FHC suffers an “injury in fact” when it uncovers housing discrimination, it

19

is an “aggrieved party” and has standing to sue under the FHA.

20

D.

21

23.

FHC’s Investigation

The FHC received a complaint that Defendants refused to permit children

22

to be outside in common areas at a rental property located in the City of Riverside. The

23

FHC investigated the complaint by visiting the subject properties and speaking to

24

former employees and tenants and conducting outreach and education at subject

25

properties. The FHC through its investigation was able to determine that discrimination

26

on the basis of familial status was occurring at the property.

27

V.

INJURY

28
COMPLAINT
-6-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 7 of 11 Page ID #:7

1

24.

As a result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Moyotl and her family suffered

2

emotional distress, anxiety, depression, frustration, fear and anger. She also suffered

3

loss of sleep, headaches and nausea.

4

25.

As a result of Defendants’ housing discrimination, Plaintiff FHC has

5

suffered and will continue to suffer injury, including the frustration of its mission to

6

achieve equal housing opportunities for all and the diversion of its resources to identify

7

and counteract Defendants’ unlawful discriminatory practices. Specifically, the FHC

8

was required to divert its scarce resources from its other fair housing obligations. Based

9

on its mission to actively promote fair housing, the FHC could not ignore the

10

discriminatory results of the initial test. The FHC was, therefore, forced to perform

11

eleven additional tests to identify Defendants’ pattern or practice of race discrimination

12

and conduct an educational workshop. These activities depleted resources from other

13

obligations such as investigating other allegations of discrimination and outreach and

14

education. Due to Defendants’ discriminatory acts, the FHC diverted resources away

15

from necessary goals. The FHC intended to open new walk-in locations to provide

16

education and outreach for fair housing rights in Murrietta, Indio and Mecca. FHC was

17

unable to open these new locations because the staff time and money needed to

18

complete the projects was necessarily diverted to investigate the claims which give rise

19

to this Complaint.

20

26.

Furthermore, Defendants’ housing discrimination frustrated the FHC’s

21

mission to eliminate housing discrimination and actively promote fair housing in the

22

City and County of Riverside. Defendants’ discrimination required the FHC to redress

23

the effects of the discrimination on the community surrounding the subject property,

24

including but not limited to, distributing flyers containing information about civil rights

25

in housing and conducting workshops regarding fair housing rights.

26

27.

Defendants’ discriminatory housing practices also deprived Plaintiff FHC,

27

its agents and employees of the statutory right to truthful information about the

28

availability of housing because of race. The FHC brings this case on its own and as a
COMPLAINT
-7-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 8 of 11 Page ID #:8

1

representative of its agents and employees whose right to truthful information about the

2

availability of housing was undermined. Accordingly, FHC is an “aggrieved party”

3

within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §3602(i) and Cal. Gov’t Code §12927(g), and seeks

4

monetary, declaratory, and injunctive relief for housing discrimination by and through

5

this action.

6

28.

Defendants’ unlawful rental practices, as described above, were wanton,

7

willful, malicious, fraudulent, and/or oppressive; were intended to cause injury; and/or

8

were done in conscious, callous, reckless, or deliberate disregard for the Plaintiff’s

9

federally protected rights. Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages.

10

29.

An actual case or controversy exists between the parties regarding

11

Defendants’ duties under federal and state fair housing laws. Accordingly, Plaintiff is

12

entitled to declaratory relief.

13

30.

Unless enjoined, Defendants will continue to engage in unlawful

14

discrimination, and the pattern or practice of discrimination described above. Plaintiff

15

has no adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief.

16

VI.

17
18
19
20

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

First Claim - Fair Housing Amendments Act
31.

Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in

paragraphs 1 through 30 above.
32.

Defendants, by and through a pattern or practice of purposeful

21

discrimination on the basis of familial status, has violated the federal Fair Housing Act,

22

42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq. (“FHAA”), in that Defendant has injured Plaintiffs by

23

engaging in the following discriminatory housing practices:

24
25

a. Making unavailable or denying a dwelling to a person because of familial
status, in violation of 42 U.S.C. §3604(a);

26

b. Imposing differential terms, treatment, conditions, or privileges associated

27

with a rental unit on prospective tenants because of familial status in

28

violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b); and
COMPLAINT
-8-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 9 of 11 Page ID #:9

1

c. Otherwise making unavailable or denying a dwelling to any person

2
3
4
5

because of familial status in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a).
33.

As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions herein alleged,

Plaintiffs have suffered, and continue to suffer injury.
34.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3613(c)(1) and (2), Defendants are liable to

6

Plaintiffs for compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’

7

fees and costs.
Second Claim – California Fair Employment and Housing Act

8
9
10
11

35.

Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in

paragraphs 1 through 34 above.
36.

Defendants, by and through a pattern or practice of discrimination on the

12

basis of familial status, violated the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal.

13

Gov’t Code § 12955 et seq., (“FEHA”), by engaging in the following discriminatory

14

housing practices:

15

a.

Discriminating against individuals on the basis of familial status in
violation of Cal. Gov’t Code § 12955(a);

16
17

b.

Otherwise making unavailable or denying a dwelling to any person
because of familial status in violation of Cal. Gov’t Code §12955(k);

18
19

c.

Aiding, abetting, inciting, compelling, or coercing the doing of any

20

of the unlawful acts or practices, or attempted to do so, in violation

21

of Cal. Gov’t Code § 12955(g); and

22

d.

Implementing and enforcing a policy or practice that has a

23

discriminatory effect on families with children in violation of Cal.

24

Gov’t Code § 12955.8.

25
26
27
28

37.

As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts, Plaintiffs have

suffered, and continue to suffer injury.
38.

Pursuant to Cal. Gov’t Code § 12989.2, Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive

relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.
COMPLAINT
-9-

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 10 of 11 Page ID #:10

1
2
3
4

Third Claim - Negligence
39.

Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in

paragraphs 1 through 38 above.
40.

Defendants owed, and continue to owe Plaintiffs a non-delegable duty to

5

operate the subject property in a manner that is free from unlawful discrimination and to

6

employ, train, and supervise their directors, employees, agents, and themselves to fulfill

7

that duty. Defendants breached that duty by engaging in a pattern or practice of

8

discrimination on the basis of familial status as herein alleged.

9

41.

10

Defendants’ negligence includes but is not limited to:
a.

Defendants’ negligent failure to supervise itself regarding

11

compliance with the requirements of federal and state fair housing

12

laws; and

13

b.

Defendants’ negligent failure to supervise agents and employees

14

regarding compliance with the requirements of federal and state

15

fair housing laws; and

16

c.

17
18
19

Defendants’ negligent failure to operate the subject property in
conformity with accepted industry custom and standards.

42.

As a result of Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiffs have suffered, and

continue to suffer injury.

20

VII.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

21

Plaintiffs pray this Court enter judgment as follows:

22

1.

Declare that the discriminatory practices of the Defendants as set forth

23

above, violate the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., and the

24

California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov’t Code § 12955 et seq.

25

2.

Enjoin Defendants from discriminating on the basis of familial status.

26

3.

Order Defendants to engage in comprehensive fair housing training.

27

4.

Order Defendants to submit to monitoring of their practices and records in

28

order to ensure compliance with the fair housing laws.
COMPLAINT
- 10 -

 Case 5:15-cv-02613 Document 1 Filed 12/22/15 Page 11 of 11 Page ID #:11

1

5.

Award compensatory damages to Plaintiffs.

2

6.

Award punitive damages to Plaintiffs.

3

7.

Award any other such damages as may be allowed by federal and state law.

4

8.

Award Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

5

9.

Additional and further relief which the Court deems just and proper.

6
7
8

VIII. JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiffs hereby demand a
trial by jury as to all issues.

9
10

Dated: December 22, 2015

Respectfully Submitted,

11
12
13
14

MARGARET ELDER
Attorney for Plaintiffs

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT
- 11 -