Giron de Reyes et al v. Waples Mobile Home Park Limited Partnership et al, No. 1:2016cv00563 - Document 56 (E.D. Va. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 09/01/2016. (mpha)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Giron de Reyes et al v. Waples Mobile Home Park Limited Partnership et al Doc. 56 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division ROSY GIRON DE REYES, et al.. Plaintiffs, Case No. l:16-cv-563 V. WAPLES MOBILE HOME PARK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et aL, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs, eight current or former residents of Waples Mobile Home Park ("the Park"), filed a six-count Complaint against the Park's owners and operators' in response to defendants' enforcement of a policy that, in plaintiffs' view, (i) impermissibly discriminates on the basis of race, national origin, alienage, and citizenship, (ii) violates the terms of their lease agreements, and (iii) violates Virginia law regulating mobile home parks. Specifically, the Complaint alleges the following causes of action: • Count I: Violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 el seq.\ • Count II: Violation of the Virginia Fair Housing Law, Va. Code § 36-96.3 et seq.; • Count III: Violation of the Manufactured Home Lot Rental Act, Va. Code § 55248.41 etseq.-, • Count IV: Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981; • Count V: Breach of contract; and • Count VI: Tortious interference with contract. ' Defendants are Waples Mobile Home Park Limited Partnership, Waples Project Limited Partnership, and A.J. Dwoskin & Associates, Inc. These parties are referred to collectively as "defendants." 1 Dockets.Justia.com Bt at this se, he llegios c uicint to sate a plasible clm that n poced to he mcits.19 Aordingly, Cont IV ts a plaible clm or elef ndr § 1981, nd defnnts' moion to diiss Cont IV mt heoe e denied. v. For e oegong esons, defennts· tiJ motion o djss Cous I, II, nd IV mt be deid. An ppiate der ill isue. Alexnia, Viia Sptmr t, 2016 T. S. Ells, Il Uited Sates D sict Judge Defndns als o rge hat plnis' § 1981 claim, ke plintifs' FHA ase of tion, qs he roniion of a new potecd cl-illegl lien-wich wold reae a olict n § 1981 d fedel iiion law. D. Reply t 17. Defdns e cot in obng ht § 1981 dos ot proct illegl alins s a cl, but inoct n ruing hat plans' § 198 l clm in his cse qes he creaion or oiion of sch a clss. Rahr, a eson's liage nd ciip e isnt om at eon's igaion sas. Of orse. as peviosly tatd. defents e ee to rue at he meits age that he Policy ws indd to dicmae oly against ilegl lins, nd hs does not n afol of§ 1981. 19 22
]]>
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.
