Ellis v. City of Minneapolis, No. 16-2019 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs filed suit challenging the City's heightened enforcement of housing and rental standards, arguing that there was a disparate impact on the availability of housing for individuals protected under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), 42 U.S.C. 3604(a). The Eighth Circuit held that plaintiffs failed to plead a prima facie case of disparate impact under the FHA. In this case, pursuant to Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 2507 (2015), plaintiff failed to, at the very least, point to an artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary policy causing the problematic disparity. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's grant of the City's motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Court Description: Melloy, Author, with Wollman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Fair Housing Act. In action by lessors alleging the City's heightened enforcement of housing and rental standards had a disparate impact on the availability of housing for persons protected by the Fair Housing Act, the district court did not err in granting the City's motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c)under the cautionary standards announced by the Supreme Court in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 2507 (2015); the plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient facts to plausibly support the existence of an arbitrary, artificial and unnecessary policy causing a problematic disparity.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.