## Facts

- Hernando Beach South was a deed-restricted subdivision in Florida governed by architectural and use restrictions requiring prior written plan approval for exterior structures and changes.
- Nicole Loren bought a home in the subdivision after receiving the deed restrictions; she lived with her mother, who had mobility impairments, and her step-aunt, who had significant disabilities and used a guide dog.
- Loren sought permission to install a four-foot chain-link fence in the front yard to increase safety for the disabled residents and the guide dog; the developer/association denied the request under restrictions and policies disfavoring front-yard chain-link fencing.
- Loren also sought permission to place a “For Sale” sign; the request was denied under the deed restrictions/policies.
- Loren applied to build a front deck and wheelchair ramp to improve access to the elevated home; that request was also denied as inconsistent with subdivision restrictions.
- Plaintiffs sued under federal and state fair housing laws and asserted First and Fourteenth Amendment claims through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- The district court granted partial summary judgment for defendants on (i) fair housing claims tied to the front-yard chain-link fence and the “For Sale” sign and (ii) all § 1983 claims.
- Remaining fair housing claims concerning the deck/ramp went to trial; a jury found no discriminatory intent in the denial of the deck and ramp application.
- Plaintiffs appealed the partial summary judgment rulings and challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury verdict.

## Issues

1. Whether denying a front-yard chain-link fence (and related enforcement of restrictions) violated federal/state fair housing laws, including reasonable-accommodation obligations.
2. Whether denial of permission to post a “For Sale” sign and enforcement of deed restrictions constituted state action supporting First and Fourteenth Amendment claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
3. Whether the appellate court could review the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s no-discriminatory-intent verdict on the deck and wheelchair ramp claim without a trial transcript.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s partial summary judgment rejecting the fair housing claim based on the denied front-yard chain-link fence.
- The court affirmed the jury’s verdict finding no discriminatory intent regarding the deck and wheelchair ramp application, concluding meaningful review was foreclosed by the absence of a trial transcript in the appellate record.
- The court affirmed summary judgment on all § 1983 claims, holding the developer and homeowners’ association were private actors and their enforcement of deed restrictions was not state action.

## Legal Principles

- Fair housing reasonable-accommodation duties require reasonable accommodations, not necessarily the specific accommodation requested, particularly where an alternative accommodation would meet the relevant disability-related needs.
- Private enforcement of deed restrictions by a developer or homeowners’ association, without a sufficient nexus to governmental involvement, is not “state action” and cannot support First or Fourteenth Amendment claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- An appellant bears the burden to provide an adequate record for appellate review; failure to supply a necessary trial transcript generally requires affirmance of a jury verdict challenged for evidentiary insufficiency.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit upheld enforcement of the subdivision’s deed restrictions because reasonable alternatives existed for disability-related safety needs, constitutional claims failed absent state action, and the challenge to the jury verdict could not be reviewed without a trial transcript.


Loren v. Sasser, 309 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir. 2002)