Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
Decision Date | 27 August 2014 |
Docket Number | Nos. 13–12625,13–13914.,s. 13–12625 |
Parties | Ajit BHOGAITA, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. ALTAMONTE HEIGHTS CONDOMINIUM ASS'N, INC., Defendant–Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Matthew W. Dietz, The Law Office of Matthew W. Dietz, Miami, FL, Aaron Carter Bates, Matthew Scott Mokwa, The Maher Law Firm, PA, Winter Park, FL, for Plaintiff–Appellee.
Scott Allan Cole, Kathryn L. Smith, Cole Scott & Kissane, PA, Miami, FL, Gregory Ackerman, Robert Alden Swift, Cole Scott & Kissane, PA, Orlando, FL, for Defendant–Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. D.C. Docket No. 6:11–cv–01637–GAP–DAB.
Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge,
Appellee Ajit Bhogaita persuaded a jury that Appellant Altamonte Heights Condominium Association, Inc., (“the Association”) violated the disability provisions of the Federal and Florida Fair Housing Acts, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(b) (“FHA”) and Fla. Stat. § 760.23(9)(b), respectively, when it enforced its pet weight policy and demanded Bhogaita remove his emotional support dog from his condominium. The jury awarded Bhogaita $5,000 in damages, and the district court awarded Bhogaita more than $100,000 in attorneys' fees. The Association appealed both the judgment entered on the jury's verdict and the award of attorneys' fees. We consolidated the appeals and now affirm.
The Association is a non-profit homeowner's association for a condominium complex located in Altamonte Springs, Florida. Bhogaita is a United States Air Force veteran who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”) that developed after a sexual assault he endured during his military service.
In 2001, Bhogaita bought a condominium unit managed by the Association and subject to its rules. Among those rules, the Association prohibited occupants from keeping dogs weighing more than twenty-five pounds. In 2008, Bhogaita acquired a dog, Kane, that exceeded the weight limit. Though no medical professional prescribed the dog initially, Bhogaita's psychiatric symptoms improved with Kane's presence, so much so that Bhogaita began to rely on the dog to help him manage his condition. He kept the dog for the next two years.
On May 4, 2010, the Association demanded that Bhogaita remove Kane from his unit, pursuant to the weight limit. Bhogaita responded by providing the first of three letters from Dr. Shih–Tzung Li, his treating psychiatrist, explaining that the dog was an emotional support animal. The first letter, written on May 7, read in relevant part:
Due to mental illness, Mr. Bhogaita has certain limitations regarding social interaction and coping with stress and anxiety. In order to help alleviate these difficulties, and to enhance his ability to live independently and to fully use and enjoy the dwelling unit, I am prescribing an emotional support animal that will assist Mr. Bhogaita in coping with his disability.
(R. 36–6 at 2.) 1 In the second letter, sent days later, Dr. Li added specific information about the dog. He wrote that Bhogaita (R. 36–6 at 3.)
In July, the Association responded by sending Bhogaita its first request for additional information regarding his disability and the need for accommodation. Specifically, it asked him:
1. What is the exact nature of your impairment? How does it substantially limit a major life activity?
2. How long have you been receiving treatment for this specific impairment?
3. How many sessions have you had with Dr. Li?
4. What specific training has your dog received?
5. Why does it require a dog over 25 pounds to afford you an equal opportunity to use and enjoy your dwelling?
(R. 36–7 at 2 (numbering added).)
Bhogaita responded later that month by providing a third letter from Dr. Li, in which the doctor indicated the nature and cause of the disability for the first time: He was treating Bhogaita for “Anxiety related to military trauma.” (R. 36–6 at 4.) Dr. Li explained further:
... [Bhogaita's condition] limits his ability to work directly with other people, a major life activity. Currently he has been hired to perform technical support work from home. He is able to work with the assistance of his emotional support animal. Otherwise his social interactions would be so overwhelming that he would be unable to perform work of any kind.
I am familiar with the therapeutic benefits of assistance animals for people with disabilities such as that experienced by Mr. Bhogaita. Upon request, I would be happy to answer other questions you may have concerning my recommendation that Mr. Bhogaita have an emotional support animal. Should you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
(R. 36–6 at 4.)
Shortly thereafter, Bhogaita also sent a response to the Association in which he answered the Association's questions in turn. Bhogaita identified his diagnosis and incorporated by reference Dr. Li's third letter to explain how his PTSD “affects major life activities.” (R. 35–5 at 17.) He also claimed an additional disability related to five knee surgeries and two separate knee injuries arising from his military service and stated that Kane “provides mobility assistance to compensate” for those injuries. (R. 35–5 at 17.)
After receiving Dr. Li's three letters and learning of Bhogaita's knee problems, the Association sent Bhogaita a second request for information on August 17, 2010. The Association's second letter stated, in relevant part:
1. Please list each individual disability that you feel your pet is required for in order for you to offset the effects of those individual disabilities. Originally you claimed one disability, now you are claiming another disability. Please list all related disabilities.
2. Please provide documentation from a medical professional(s) that clearly supports that you have any of the disabilities noted above, disabilities that substantially limit a major life activity, and that you are in need of a trained “support animal” that exceeds the 25 pound weight limit for that disability. Please include contact physician information as well.
3. If you add names of any additional medical professional(s) from your original submission only of Dr. Li, please include how many sessions you have had with those additional physicians similar to the information you provided regarding your sessions with Dr. Li.
4. Please provide all information related to the professional training your pet has successfully completed regarding the assistance you claim he/she is required to offer you as a support animal. This requested information shall include the type of training the pet received specific to the disability, the dates of training, the location of training, names and contact name of the trainer(s), and copies of any certificates of successful completion.
(R. 36–8 at 2–3 (numbering added).)
Nearly two and a half months passed, during which time Bhogaita did not respond. On November 3, 2010, the Association sent a third request for information, this time requesting a sworn statement from Dr. Li to include “specific facts”:
1. “[D]etail[ing] the exact nature of [Bhogaita's] alleged mental disability”;
2. Listing the treatment he was receiving, including “a list of all medications, the number of counseling session per week, etc.”;
3. Explaining “how the diagnosis was made”;
4. Listing “the total number of hours and sessions of mental health treatment ... received from the psychiatrist”;
5. Disclosing how long Dr. Li had been treating Bhogaita as well as how long Bhogaita had been in treatment generally;
6. Answering whether Bhogaita's “condition is permanent or temporary”;
7. Listing treatments “prescribed ... moving forward”;
8. Describing “how the mental disability substantially limits [Bhogaita's] major life activities”; and
9. Explaining why a smaller dog would not sufficiently provide Bhogaita “an equal opportunity to enjoy his unit.”
(R. 35–5 at 24.) Additionally, the Association sought documentation on “the individualized training” the dog received, including dates, contact information for the trainer, and copies of any certifications. (R. 35–5 at 24.) That letter went on to state that Bhogaita was to respond by December 6, and if he did not, the letter would “serve as the Association's formal demand for [Bhogaita] to remove any dogs over 25 lbs from [his] unit no later than December 10, 2010.” (R. 35–5 at 25.) If Bhogaita failed to comply, the Association said it would “be forced to file for Arbitration.” (R. 35–5 at 25.) It instructed Bhogaita, “PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY.” (R. 35–5 at 25.)
Rather than responding, Bhogaita filed a complaint with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) and the Florida Commission on Human Relations (“the Commission”). He claimed that the Association's conduct amounted to a failure to make a reasonable accommodation in violation of the disability provisions of the Federal and Florida Fair Housing Acts. In January 2011, HUD and the Commission issued findings of cause against the Association. Accordingly, the Association agreed to allow Bhogaita to keep Kane.
In October 2011, Bhogaita brought suit. On the Association's motion, the district court dismissed Bhogaita's claim of disability discrimination brought under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(2), while his reasonable accommodation claim, under § 3604(f)(3) and analogous Florida...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Swanston v. City of Plano
...v. Habitat for Humanity of Citrus Cnty., Inc. , 938 F.3d 1259, 1266–67 (11th Cir. 2019) (quoting Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n, Inc. , 765 F.3d 1277, 1288 (11th Cir. 2014) ). As a highly fact-specific inquiry, the reasonableness determination requires this "complex balancing of......
-
Revock v. Cowpet Bay W. Condo. Ass'n
...F.3d 92, 100 (1st Cir. 2016) ; Anderson v. City of Blue Ash , 798 F.3d 338, 363 (6th Cir. 2015) ; Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n, Inc. , 765 F.3d 1277, 1289 (11th Cir. 2014). In emotional support animal cases, a housing provider may contest whether the accommodation is reasonabl......
-
Welsh v. McNeil
...in the exercise or enjoyment of any right granted or protected under this chapter.").62 See, e.g., Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n, 765 F.3d 1277, 1289 (11th Cir. 2014) (affirming judgment that condominium association violated the Fair Housing Act by enforcing its pet weight rule......
-
Belcher v. Grand Reserve MGM, LLC
...opportunity to use and enjoy his dwelling, and (4) the defendants refused to make the accommodation." Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass'n , 765 F.3d 1277, 1285 (11th Cir. 2014). In their briefs, Plaintiffs did not cite any evidence that Defendants discriminated against them because o......
-
Appeals
...1060 (9 th Cir. 2014); Davis v. King , 560 Fed.Appx. 756, 762 (10 th Cir. 2014); Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condominium Ass’n, Inc. , 765 F.3d 1277, 1285 (11 th Cir. 2014); National Black Police Ass’n v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and Ethics , 168 F.3d 525, 529 (D.C. Cir. 1999......
-
PROPERTY LAW FOR THE AGES.
...See Cookman, supra note 29, at 229-30. (343.) See supra note 321 and accompanying text. (344.) 42 U.S.C. [section] 3604(f)(1)-(2). (345.) 765 F.3d 1277, 1281 (11th Cir. (346.) Id (347.) Id. at 1288-89. (348.) See, e.g., Revock v. Cowpet Bay W. Condo. Ass'n, 853 F.3d 96,110 (3d Cir. 2017); S......
-
Being Persuaded to Sleep With Someone in Order to Have a Place to Sleep: the Eleventh Circuit's Analysis of Sexual Harassment Claims Under the Fair Housing Act
...Stat. Ann. § 760.23 (2020).51. 42 U.S.C.S. § 3604; Fla. Stat. Ann. § 760.23.52. Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condominium Ass'n, Inc., 765 F.3d 1277, 1285 (11th Cir. 2014) (citing Loren v. Sasser, 309 F.3d 1296, 1299 n.9 (11th Cir. 2002)).53. Loren, 309 F.3d at 1299 n.9 (citing 28 U.S.C. § ......