## Facts

- Sandy Hill Apartments (Sandy Hill) owned and operated an apartment building.
- Kossiwa Kudawoo and her boyfriend, Chima Ochiagha, rented an apartment from Sandy Hill.
- During the tenancy, an incident occurred in which Kudawoo screamed at and physically assaulted Ochiagha.
- After the incident, Sandy Hill evicted Kudawoo.
- Sandy Hill later claimed rent remained due after the eviction and asserted Kudawoo was responsible for rent until the unit was re-rented.
- When Kudawoo did not pay the demanded rent, Sandy Hill sued in Minnesota state court to recover unpaid rent.
- Kudawoo filed counterclaims and removed the case to federal court, alleging Sandy Hill violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) by discriminating against her because of sex.
- The record contained no evidence that Sandy Hill treated Kudawoo differently than male tenants who screamed at and physically assaulted other tenants.

## Issues

1. Whether Kudawoo presented sufficient evidence to allow a reasonable jury to find that Sandy Hill’s eviction and rent-collection efforts were motivated by sex in violation of the FHA.

## Decision

- The court granted Sandy Hill’s motion for summary judgment on Kudawoo’s FHA sex-discrimination counterclaim.
- The court concluded that Kudawoo failed to produce evidence creating a genuine dispute of material fact that Sandy Hill acted because of her sex.
- The absence of evidence that similarly situated male tenants were treated more favorably defeated Kudawoo’s disparate-treatment theory.

## Legal Principles

- Summary judgment is proper when the record shows no genuine dispute of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
- An FHA disparate-treatment claim requires evidence from which a factfinder could conclude that a protected characteristic (here, sex) motivated the challenged housing action.
- A common way to show discriminatory intent is comparator evidence showing that similarly situated persons outside the protected class were treated more favorably; without such evidence (or other proof of discriminatory motive), the claim fails as a matter of law.
- When a housing provider offers a nondiscriminatory explanation for its conduct, the claimant must come forward with evidence that would permit a reasonable jury to find intentional discrimination, rather than mere disagreement with the provider’s decision.

## Conclusion

The district court entered summary judgment for Sandy Hill because Kudawoo’s FHA claim rested on an allegation of sex discrimination without evidentiary support, including no showing that male tenants who engaged in comparable conduct received different treatment.


Sandy Hill Apartments v. Kudawoo, 2006 WL 2974305 (2006)