## Facts

- Ann Soper, a wheelchair user, lived in a trailer in a park owned and operated by Jack and Beverly Freer.
- Entry to Soper’s trailer required ascending five steps; without a ramp, she had to be carried or otherwise assisted into her home.
- Soper sought permission to install a wheelchair ramp at her own expense; her proposed design wrapped around the side and front of the trailer and partially extended into her driveway.
- The Freers refused the proposed configuration, asserting it would interfere with potential trailer removal and shorten the driveway so parked vehicles would obstruct the park access road.
- The Freers offered an alternative ramp design; Soper rejected it as too steep and difficult to use given her disability.
- Soper was injured while being assisted up the steps, supporting the claimed immediacy of the access and safety problem.
- Evidence before the court indicated the proposed ramp could be disassembled in roughly three hours and called into question the alleged traffic and removal impediments.
- The United States brought suit under the Fair Housing Act on Soper’s administrative complaint and moved for a preliminary injunction requiring the Freers to permit installation of Soper’s proposed ramp.

## Issues

1. Whether the United States established irreparable harm and either (a) likelihood of success on the merits or (b) serious questions on the merits plus a balance of hardships tipping decisively in its favor, warranting a preliminary injunction.
2. Whether the Freers’ refusal to permit Soper’s preferred ramp configuration likely constituted a failure to make a reasonable accommodation under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).

## Decision

- The court granted the United States’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
- The court found irreparable harm because Soper lacked safe, independent ingress and egress and faced ongoing risk of injury.
- The court found at least a likelihood of success (or, alternatively, serious questions with hardships favoring the movant) on the FHA reasonable-accommodation claim.
- The court ordered the Freers to permit installation of Soper’s proposed ramp, subject to conditions set by the injunction.

## Legal Principles

- A preliminary injunction may issue upon a showing of irreparable harm and either (a) likelihood of success on the merits or (b) sufficiently serious merits questions and a balance of hardships tipping decidedly toward the movant.
- The Fair Housing Act prohibits refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services when necessary to afford a person with a disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).
- Ongoing inability to safely access and use one’s dwelling due to disability-related barriers can constitute irreparable harm not adequately remedied by later monetary damages.
- In assessing reasonableness, courts consider necessity for meaningful access and the burden on the housing provider, including whether asserted safety or operational concerns are supported by evidence rather than speculation.
- An offered alternative accommodation may be insufficient if it does not provide practical usability for the individual’s disability-related needs.

## Conclusion

The court required the trailer-park owners to allow a tenant-funded wheelchair ramp because the tenant faced immediate, continuing harm from unsafe access to her home and the government showed a strong case that denying the workable ramp configuration likely violated the Fair Housing Act’s reasonable-accommodation duty.


United States v. Freer, 864 F. Supp. 324 (W.D.N.Y. 1994)