Skold v. Johnson
| Decision Date | 15 June 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 8026-1-I,8026-1-I |
| Citation | 630 P.2d 456,29 Wn.App. 541 |
| Parties | Karen and Douglas SKOLD, Elizabeth Goble, Respondents, v. Phillip T. JOHNSON, Milton Jackson, Respondents, Washington State Human Rights Commission, Appellants. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
Winslow Whitman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Seattle, for appellants.
Edwards E. Merges, Steve Navaretta, Seattle, for respondents.
The Washington State Human Rights Commission (Commission) appeals the superior court's remand of certain remedial portions of its hearing tribunal's order entered in this case involving alleged racial discrimination in the leasing of real property. The respondents Skold and Goble cross-appeal on other issues.
Douglas and Karen Skold, respondents and cross-appellants, have owned the 24-unit Skold Apartments, located in Seattle's Capitol Hill area, since 1972. Elizabeth Goble, respondent and cross-appellant, has been the resident manager since 1973. 1 A Commission tribunal hearing in July 1977 disclosed the following.
On June 15, 1975, Kenneth Davidson, a tenant living across the hall from Goble, mistakenly thought he heard his buzzer ring. He testified that when he opened his door, Goble, who was standing in her doorway, put her hands up and said, " 'Don't answer it, they're colored' or something to that effect." He looked down the hall toward the main entrance and observed a black couple standing outside the glass doors. Davidson testified that Goble told him she was acting under orders from the Skolds to not open the door and show any apartments to blacks. He testified that Goble told him she would lose her job if she arranged for blacks to be interviewed by the Skolds, who usually interviewed all prospective tenants. Davidson testified that Goble indicated she knew her actions were illegal, but said she was only acting under orders.
About 1 week later, Davidson and Douglas Skold discussed Skold's rental policies. Davidson testified that Skold said Goble had not done anything wrong, but had acted the way he wanted her to act. According to Davidson, Skold said that the civil rights act was wrong and immoral, and that he would continue his practices rather than follow the act. Davidson testified that Skold said he would rent to an old, well-recommended black woman, but that in so many words, he did not want to interview blacks. Davidson, an attorney who was active on civil rights committees of the Seattle-King County Bar Association, testified he offered to help Skold set up nonracial standards at no charge, but Skold refused. Shortly thereafter, Davidson vacated his apartment, and wrote a letter to the Commission reciting these events.
In late July 1975, complainant Phillip T. Johnson observed an apparent vacancy in the Skold Apartments from the street. Although Johnson did not see a vacancy sign, a man in the Skold parking lot indicated to Johnson that there might be a vacancy. Johnson rang the manager's buzzer and received no response on that day or the next. The second day, he saw a sprinkler on outside the building, and decided to wait in his car to see if someone would come outside to turn it off. When Goble did so, Johnson approached her and inquired about vacancies. Johnson testified that Goble said she was not the manager, "just the cleaning lady." Johnson testified he was not sure if Goble said he should come back to see the manager or not. Johnson testified that Goble's apparel appeared inappropriate for a cleaning lady. He subsequently filed a complaint with the Commission.
In early August 1975, Cynthia Wood and William Garvin, two Commission staff members, went to the Skold Apartments to conduct a housing test. Garvin testified that he did not see a vacancy sign, but each testified they observed an apparent vacancy from the street. When Wood, who is white, rang the manager's buzzer alone, Goble responded. Goble first said that the apartment had been rented, but after a brief conversation, Goble showed Wood the apartment and said she would contact the owners to determine if it had been in fact rented.
As Wood was returning to her car, she was approached by complainant Milton Jackson, a black. Jackson lived across the street from the Skold Apartments and had observed Goble showing the apartment to Wood. When Jackson asked Wood if there was a vacancy, she replied that he should find out for himself. Jackson rang the manager's buzzer and received no response, although Goble, a gray-haired woman whom he recognized to be the manager, looked out into the hallway three or four times.
Garvin, who is also black, approached Jackson as he was leaving the building, identified himself as a Commission staff member, and told him he was going to check out the building. Garvin then rang the manager's buzzer, stood in front of the plate glass doors so he could be seen, and observed a gray-haired Caucasian woman "peep out around the corner." No one responded to Garvin's ring after three attempts. Garvin later took an affidavit from Jackson, who subsequently filed a complaint with the Commission.
Douglas Skold testified that he never told Kenneth Davidson that he refused to rent to blacks, but rather that in the past he had some "problems" with blacks but "mainly with younger people" of both races. 2 Skold testified that Davidson "seemed to turn everything (he said) into a discriminatory situation," but that he had told Davidson that he
felt sympathetic to the blacks just as much as he did, and I felt that as a landlord I had done probably more than he had done to provide good housing on the same basis for them as anybody else, but that I had to take an application and treat the situation from a business point of view also.
Skold testified that very few blacks brought a rental application back. Skold testified that his building's general policy was that "if we didn't have a vacancy, we normally didn't answer the door." He stated that Davidson's apartment, although vacant, was not yet ready for rental when the Johnson and Jackson incidents occurred, due to the need for repairs and redecorating.
Elizabeth Goble testified that she had never refused to take an application from a person because of their race, creed, or color. She testified that there was no vacancy sign posted on the day of the Davidson incident, and that she had told Davidson that it was Sunday and she did not have to work on Sunday. She testified that she had indeed told Phillip Johnson that she was the cleaning lady, "which I am," further explaining that although there was a vacancy when Johnson inquired, she had not yet been told it was ready to be shown. Goble testified she told Johnson that he should come back that evening when the owners would be there.
The tribunal found that the respondents had a policy and practice of refusing to answer the manager's buzzer when rung by prospective black tenants, and that the evidence showed a pattern and practice of a discrimination in rental policies on the basis of race that amounted to a conscious and intentional violation of the civil rights laws. It concluded that the respondents had committed unfair practices in real estate transactions because of race in violation of RCW 49.60.222(1) through (5). 3
In an eight-paragraph order, the terms of which are significant upon appeal, the tribunal ordered relief that was virtually identical to what the Commission requested in its amended complaint. 4 Respondents were ordered to:
1. Cease and desist the unfair practices committed within the meaning of RCW 49.60.222(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5).
2. Pay to complainants Phillip T. Johnson and Milton Jackson the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000) each for loss of the right to (be) free from discrimination in a real property transaction. RCW 49.60.225.
3. Notify Phillip T. Johnson and Milton Jackson by registered mail, with copies to the Washington State Human Rights Commission (1601 Second Avenue Building, Fourth Floor, Seattle, Washington (98101), Attn: Compliance Review Staffperson), of the first two vacancies to arise in the Skold Apartments. If Mr. Johnson or Mr. Jackson do not wish to rent the first two available apartments but desire to rent in the Skold Apartments anytime within two (2) years of entry of the final order in this cause, they shall retain a right of first refusal for all vacancies occurring during that period.
4. Post forthwith in a conspicuous place by the manager's apartment, an "Equal Opportunity in Housing" poster to be provided by the Washington State Human Rights Commission, which is clearly visible to all applicants for apartments at the Skold Apartments. The "Equal Opportunity in Housing" poster shall remain posted in accordance with this paragraph for a period of two years.
5. Indicate every vacancy occurring in the Skold Apartments for the next three (3) years by posting in a conspicuous place a "Vacancy" sign immediately upon the occurrence of such vacancy.
6. Within thirty (30) days of entry of the tribunal's final Order, file with the hearing tribunal, and serve upon counsel for the Commission, proposed written objective nonracial standards and criteria for the processing and approval of applications for apartments at the Skold Apartments. Counsel for the Commission shall have ten (10) days within which to file objections with the hearing tribunal regarding the proposed standards and criteria. If no objections are made by counsel for the Commission, the hearing tribunal will approve entry of an Order implementing said standards and criteria. If counsel for the Commission object to the proposed standards and criteria, the hearing tribunal will hold a prompt hearing with respect to the adequacy of respondents' proposed standards, and with respect to the Commission's objections thereto, and will order the implementation of objective standards and procedures either as proposed by respondents or otherwise. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Witters v. State, Com'n for the Blind
...Board of Regents, supra; State ex rel. Gunstone v. State Hwy. Comm'n, 72 Wash.2d 673, 674-75, 434 P.2d 734 (1967); Skold v. Johnson, 29 Wash.App. 541, 630 P.2d 456 (1981); Franklin Cy. Sheriff's Office v. Sellers, 97 Wash.2d 317, 323, 646 P.2d 113 (1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1106, 103 S.......
-
Marrs v. Board of Medicine
...102 Cal.Rptr. 758, 498 P.2d 1006 (1972); O'Donnell v. Bassler, 289 Md. 501, 509-511, 425 A.2d 1003 (1981). Skold v. Johnson, 29 Wash.App. 541, 549-551; 630 P.2d 456 (1981).Marrs cites Poirier v. Dep't. of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 351 So.2d 50, 55 (Fla.App., 1977), for the propositi......
-
Franklin County Sheriff's Office v. Sellers
...to be fair and impartial to all parties and persons did not violate the County's right to a fair hearing. See also Skold v. Johnson, 29 Wash.App. 541, 630 P.2d 456 (1981). Another assertion made by the County is that Sellers' claim is fatally deficient in that she did not make formal applic......
-
Lewis County v. Public Employment Relations Commission
...had proved futile. The remedy was proper to curtail Lewis County's dilatory tactics and prevent their recurrence, Skold v. Johnson, 29 Wash.App. 541, 551, 630 P.2d 456 (1981), and was necessary to make the cease and desist order effective. Board of Trustees, 93 Wash.2d at 69, 605 P.2d 1252.......