Smith v. Avant

249 F.Supp. 3d 1194 (2017)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Avanti (D) is the owner of real property. As of April 24, 2015, D had rented one of the townhouses to a couple (Matthew and Chiara) and was advertising on Craigslist the other townhouse as available for rent. Rachel Smith is a transgender woman. She and Tonya Smith (Ps) have been married for more than five years. They are the parents of K.S. and I.S., minor children. On April 24, 2015, Ps found D's rental advertisement on Craigslist. They emailed D. P discussed her family, including mentioning that Rachel is transgender. D asked P to send photos of all of them. P sent a photo of the Smith Family as requested and P and D met that evening. After returning home, D emailed P twice that night. In the first email, D told P they were not welcome to rent the Townhouse because of Matt and Chiara's concerns regarding their children and 'noise.' In the second email, D said she talked to her husband and they have 'kept a low profile' and 'want to continue it' that way. D conveyed she would not rent either residence to Ps. P responded to D's email, asking her what she meant by 'low profile.' D replied that Ps' 'unique relationship' and 'uniqueness' would become the town focus. D even said she talked to a 'psychic friend' who 'has a transvestite friend herself.' D continued to attempt to rent housing on her property. Ps were unable to find a rental before they had to move out of their apartment. They moved into Rachel's mother's house for a week and had to get rid of many of their possessions as the house was too small for them to keep all of their belongings. D's Properties were of higher quality, were located in a better school district, and had nicer surroundings. Their current place does not meet their needs. The move also required an hour's commute for Rachel, whereas D's Properties would have only required a 20 minutes' commute for work. Rachel has since changed jobs, which is closer to the parties' new apartment. Ps filed this lawsuit claiming Sex Discrimination in violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a) & (c), Discrimination based on Familial Status in violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a) & (c), Sex Discrimination in violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, C.R.S. § 24-34-502, Sexual Orientation Discrimination in violation of the Colorado Anti Discrimination Act, C.R.S. § 24-34-502; and Discrimination based on Familial Status, in violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, C.R.S. § 24-34-502. Ps move for summary judgment on the issue of liability