42 Cited authorities

Warth v. Seldin
422 U.S. 490 (1975) Cited 11,925 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"
Mazurek v. Armstrong
520 U.S. 968 (1997) Cited 3,377 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief has a "requirement for substantial proof is much higher" than a defendant's summary judgment motion
Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo
456 U.S. 305 (1982) Cited 1,774 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that Federal Water Pollution Control Act did not mandate injunctions against its violation
Overstreet v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County
305 F.3d 566 (6th Cir. 2002) Cited 1,335 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that this Court "will not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal unless our failure to consider the issue will result in a plain miscarriage of justice"
Lemon v. Kurtzman
411 U.S. 192 (1973) Cited 468 times
Holding plaintiffs who were granted injunctive relief failed to show form of injunction was too narrow
Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England
454 F.3d 290 (D.C. Cir. 2006) Cited 412 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that Navy's "practice of retaining Catholic chaplains past applicable age limits" constituted only "hypothetical" injury for Protestant chaplains
Hamad v. Woodcrest Condominium Ass'n
328 F.3d 224 (6th Cir. 2003) Cited 425 times
Holding that plaintiffs had standing because they “suffered the stigmatic harm of living in a community whose members were segregated on the basis of a prohibited classification”
Wisconsin Gas Co. v. F.E.R.C
758 F.2d 669 (D.C. Cir. 1985) Cited 650 times
Holding that to establish irreparable harm the movant must "substantiate the claim that irreparable injury is 'likely' to occur. . . . Bare allegations of what is likely to occur are of no value."
Cityfed Fin. v. Office of Thrift Supervision
58 F.3d 738 (D.C. Cir. 1995) Cited 346 times
Holding that a moving party's failure to make a showing of irreparable injury "alone is sufficient" to deny a motion for a preliminary injunction
U.S. v. Edward Rose Sons
384 F.3d 258 (6th Cir. 2004) Cited 248 times
Holding the defendant responsible for harm resulting from the injunction
Section 3604 - Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices
42 U.S.C. § 3604 Cited 4,102 times 64 Legal Analyses
Requiring any "accommodation" in "rules, policies, practices, or services" to be "reasonable"
Section 3601 - Declaration of policy
42 U.S.C. § 3601 Cited 4,007 times 44 Legal Analyses
Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”
Section 3613 - Enforcement by private persons
42 U.S.C. § 3613 Cited 1,550 times 6 Legal Analyses
Granting right to sue in state or federal court
Section 3614 - Enforcement by Attorney General
42 U.S.C. § 3614 Cited 205 times 5 Legal Analyses
Allowing courts to impose a fine of up to $75,000, as adjusted for inflation by 28 C.F.R. § 85.3(b)
Section 100.201 - Definitions
24 C.F.R. § 100.201 Cited 100 times 1 Legal Analyses
Explaining that the phrase "a record of having such an impairment," 42 U.S.C. § 3602(h), means that the person "has a history of, or has been misclassified as having, a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities"
Section 100.1 - Authority
24 C.F.R. § 100.1 Cited 7 times
This regulation is issued under the authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to administer and enforce title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (the Fair Housing Act). 24 C.F.R. §100.1

Equal Rights Center v. Post Properties, Inc. et al

42 Cited authorities

Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

Holding that "a plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief has a "requirement for substantial proof is much higher" than a defendant's summary judgment motion

Holding that Federal Water Pollution Control Act did not mandate injunctions against its violation

Holding that this Court "will not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal unless our failure to consider the issue will result in a plain miscarriage of justice"

Holding plaintiffs who were granted injunctive relief failed to show form of injunction was too narrow

Holding that Navy's "practice of retaining Catholic chaplains past applicable age limits" constituted only "hypothetical" injury for Protestant chaplains

Holding that plaintiffs had standing because they “suffered the stigmatic harm of living in a community whose members were segregated on the basis of a prohibited classification”

Holding that to establish irreparable harm the movant must "substantiate the claim that irreparable injury is 'likely' to occur. . . . Bare allegations of what is likely to occur are of no value."

Holding that a moving party's failure to make a showing of irreparable injury "alone is sufficient" to deny a motion for a preliminary injunction

Holding the defendant responsible for harm resulting from the injunction

Requiring any "accommodation" in "rules, policies, practices, or services" to be "reasonable"

Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”

Granting right to sue in state or federal court

Allowing courts to impose a fine of up to $75,000, as adjusted for inflation by 28 C.F.R. § 85.3(b)

Explaining that the phrase "a record of having such an impairment," 42 U.S.C. § 3602(h), means that the person "has a history of, or has been misclassified as having, a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities"