UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce a conciliation agreement entered into pursuant to provisions of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (the Fair Housing Act), as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq.
2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1345, and 42 U.S.C. § 3614(b)(2). Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
3. Defendant Dennis Raimo is a resident of the Northern District of Illinois. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Raimo was the president of the Defendant companies, Denray Insurance Services, Inc. and Denray Management Services, Inc.
4. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Denray Insurance Services, Inc. has been an Illinois corporation doing business in the Northern District of Illinois.
5. Defendant Denray Management Services, Inc. is an Illinois corporation doing business in the Northern District of Illinois.
6. The house at 7113 S. King Drive, Chicago, Illinois, 60619 is a "dwelling" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 3602(b).
7. On August 27, 2002, Theresa Hill filed a complaint with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") alleging that Defendants had discriminated against her on the basis of race and sex by engaging in discriminatory financing in a residential real-estate transaction (42 U.S.C. § 3605); discriminating in provision of brokerage services (42 U.S.C. § 3606); discriminating in the terms, conditions, or privileges of services and facilities (42 U.S.C. § 3604); and violating 42 U.S.C. § 3617, which prohibits interference, coercion, or intimidation with respect to the rights protected by 42 U.S.C. §§ 3603, 3604, 3605, and 3606.
8. After the commencement of an investigation by HUD, but before HUD reached a determination of the merits of Hill's complaint, the parties entered into a Conciliation Agreement through the HUD conciliation process as provided for in 42 U.S.C. § 3610(b). The Conciliation Agreement became effective on July 11, 2003, when it was approved by HUD. A true and accurate copy of the executed Conciliation Agreement is attached as Exhibit A.
9. The Conciliation Agreement provided that Defendants must pay Complainant Theresa Hill the sum of $1,000.00 upon the signing of the Agreement, i.e., on or before July 11, 2003.
10. Subject to Defendants' performance of their obligations under the Conciliation Agreement, Complainant agreed to waive, release, and covenant not to sue Defendants with respect to any matters that were or might have been alleged as charges filed with HUD.
11. The Defendants have breached the Conciliation Agreement by failing to make the $1,000.00 payment to Ms. Hill in a timely manner.
12. On or around July 8 and again on July 22, HUD granted Defendant Raimo's requests for an extension of time to pay Ms. Hill the $1,000.00 due under the Conciliation Agreement. Pursuant to the second and final extension of time, Defendants were required to pay $1,000.00 to Ms. Hill on or before July 31, 2003. Defendants did not make the required payment to Ms. Hill by July 31, 2003, and they have still not made the required payment. Accordingly, Defendants have been in breach of the Conciliation Agreement since at least July 31, 2003.
13. On October 30, 2003, HUD referred this matter to the Attorney General for enforcement of the Conciliation Agreement pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 3610(c) and 3614(b)(2).
14. HUD complainant Theresa Hill is an "aggrieved party" as defined in 42 U.S.C. 3602(i), and has complied with her obligations under the Conciliation Agreement in all respects.
15. Defendants' breach of the Conciliation Agreement was willful and in bad faith.
WHEREFORE, the United States prays that this court:
1. Enforce the Conciliation Agreement and require that Defendants immediately pay Theresa Hill $1,000.00 by sending a certified check or money order to the United States, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(1)(A);
2. Award monetary damages to Theresa Hill, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(1)(B);
3. Assess a civil penalty against Defendants to vindicate the public interest, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(1)(C);
4. Enjoin Defendants from any further failure to comply with the Conciliation Agreement in the future; and
5. Award such additional relief as the interests of justice may require.
| JOHN D. ASHCROFT |
| PATRICK J. FITZGERALD |
United States Attorney
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division _______________________
STEVEN H. ROSENBAUM
Chief, Housing and Civil
| JOAN LASER |
Assistant U.S. Attorney
219 S. Dearborn St.
Chicago, IL 60604
Tel: (312) 353-5300
| TIMOTHY J. MORAN|
RIGEL C. OLIVERI
New York State Bar No. 560115
Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Housing and Civil Enforcement
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20530
Tel: (202) 305-3109
Fax: (202) 514-1116
Document Filed: January 27, 2004 > >