Reasonable Accommodation for Tenant Didn't Include Transfer to Larger Market-Rate Unit

LVT Number: #32297

In 2017, tenant and her disabled child were selected from a pool of more than 75,000 lottery applicants to receive a one-bedroom in landlord's apartment building. The apartment was one of a limited number of affordable housing units in a building subject to HPD's Inclusionary Housing Program. Despite her concerns as to whether there was enough space in the apartment for tenant, her mobility-impaired son, and the medical equipment and services needed to support him, tenant accepted the apartment.

In 2017, tenant and her disabled child were selected from a pool of more than 75,000 lottery applicants to receive a one-bedroom in landlord's apartment building. The apartment was one of a limited number of affordable housing units in a building subject to HPD's Inclusionary Housing Program. Despite her concerns as to whether there was enough space in the apartment for tenant, her mobility-impaired son, and the medical equipment and services needed to support him, tenant accepted the apartment.

After moving in, tenant quickly found the apartment to be too small and asked to be transferred to a two-bedroom unit. Between June 2018, when tenant made that request, and December 2020, when she moved out, no two-bedroom units became available. Tenant then filed a housing discrimination complaint with HUD, as well as a complaint with the NY State Division of Human Rights (DHR). DHR and HUD both found no probable cause to believe landlord engaged in unlawful discrimination. Tenant then sued landlord in federal court in 2020. 

The court ruled for landlord and dismissed tenant's disability discrimination claims, finding no disparate treatment or failure to make a reasonable accommodation. The two-bedroom apartment that tenant argued should've been offered to her by landlord was instead offered to another applicant who also had a family member with mobility disabilities. And even if there was some error made in tenant's placement, there was no pretext by landlord or discrimination based on the son's disabilities.

Landlord also did provide a reasonable accommodation by placing tenant at the top of a list for transfer to a two-bedroom unit. There was no showing by tenant that any affordable two-bedroom unit became available or could've been made available to her. A duty to provide a reasonable accommodation didn't require landlord to transfer tenant to a market-rate apartment in the building. At the time of tenant's request, the annual rent for a two-bedroom affordable unit was $13,992, while the annual market-rate rent for a two-bedroom in the building was between $73,200 and $108,000. Such an accommodation would impose far more than a "modest" cost on landlord and would impose an undue hardship and substantial burden on the housing provider. The court also found no source of income discrimination against tenant. 

Shorupska v. 525 West 52 Prop. Owner LLC, City of NY: Index No. 20 Civ. 2831, 2022 US Dist LEXIS 158588, 2022 WL 3997781 (SDNY; 9/1/22; Failla, J)