see objects at a distance and severely restricts his peripheral vision. Dexter’s condition is
degenerative and he has been warmed by doctors that he may eventually lose his sight
completely. [See letters from Dr. Robert G. Taub and Dr. David J. Palmer, attached as Exhibit

“A”.

11. In January of 2002, Dexter’s handicap forced him to retire from his job as a bus
driver for Budget Rental Car and Chicago School Transit. He currently receives long term
disability payments from Budget Rental Car and monthly disability payments from the Social
Security Administration. Dexter’s diabetes and his resultant health afflictions, including his
vision disability and a heart condition, have made it virtually impossible for Dexter to obtain

other employment.

B. Mr. Saffold Attempts to Gain a Reasonable Accommodation and
Subsequently Files a HUD Complaint,

12: On October 31, 2002, Dexter entered into a lease to rent a third floor apartment in
the building that Steadman Realty owned and managed at 3143 West 60" Street, Chicago, IL,
60629. When Dexter agreed to rent the third floor apartment, he requested that Mr. Steadman
apprise him of any future openings in first floor apartments. Dexter told Mr. Steadman that he
preferred a first floor apartment as he experienced great difficulty negotiating stairs due to his

vision impairment.

13. Beginning on October 31, 2002, Dexter regularly contacted Mr. Steadman and

other employees of Steadman Realty, inquiring about an available first floor apartment.

14. Inearly July of 2003, an employee of Steadman Realty (not Mr. Steadman)

informed Dexter that a first floor apartment in the same building Dexter resided in would be



accommodation and, as a result, denied Dexter an equal opportunity to use and enjoy his

dwelling and caused him harm.

36. | The conduct of Defendant constitutes an actionable discriminatory housing

practice in violation of 42 U.S.C. §3604(f).

37. As adirect and proximate result of Defendant’s acts alleged herein, Dexter has

suffered and continues to suffer damage.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against the
Defendant for compensatory and punitive damages, court filing fees, declaratory and injunctive

relief, and such other relief this Court finds just and proper under the circumstances.

COUNT I
DEFENDANT’S COERCION, INTIMIDATION, THREATS AND

INTERFERENCE IN VIOLATION OF THE FAIR HOUSING ACT (42 U.S.C. §3617)
38. Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-36 of this Complaint and incorporates them by

teference as though fully set forth herein.

39. Defendant and its agents, with full knowledge of Dexter’s attempts to exercise his
fair housing rights, have coerced, intimidated, threatened and/or interfered with Dexter in the
exercise of his fair housing rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. §3617.

40. The conduct of Defendant constitutes an actionable discriminatory housing
practice in violation of 42 U.S.C. §3617.

41. As adirect and proximate result of Defendant’s acts alleged herein, Dexter has

suffered and continues to suffer damage.


19. On August 13, 2003, Mr. Steadman sent a signed letter [attached as Exhibit “B”}
formally denying Dexter occupancy of the first floor apartment on the grounds that (a) Mr.
Steadman thought Dexter was a poor housekeeper and (b) Mr. Steadman’s alleged observance of
Dexter operating a vehicle, an activity Mr. Steadman felt was inconsistent with a vision

disability.

20. On September 2, 2003, Dexter responded with a letter dated August 20, 2003
[attached as Exhibit “C”], revisiting the conversation of August 11, 2003 and formally reiterating
his request for a guide dog. Dexter attached a series of doctors’ letters to this correspondence,
which collectively documented (i) the severity of Dexter’s vision handicap and (ii) Dexter’s

application for a guide dog.
21. Dexter received no response from Defendant to his letter of August 20, 2003.

22.  Dexter’s eye doctor filled out an eye examination form on Dexter’s behalf for
submission to a guide dog company [attached as Exhibit “D’’] and noted in a letter that Dexter
was in need of a seeing eye dog to assist him in locomotion [attached as Exhibit “E”]. Following
the company’s receipt of Dexter’s eye examination form, Dexter contacted the company about
their training program designed to acclimate guide dogs to their new owners. Since Mr.
Steadman denied Dexter’s request to have a guide dog reside in the apartment, Dexter believed it

would be futile to undergo the extensive training program and expense necessary to acquire a

guide dog.

23. Unable to obtain a reasonable accommodation from Defendant, Dexter filed a

Complaint in the Northern District of Illinois on October 15, 2003.



available on July 31, 2003. On July 31, Dexter called Mr. Steadman and asked to view the
apartment. Mr. Steadman stated he did not have the keys, but would be receiving them later that

week.

15. Dexter responded by informing Mr. Steadman that he would be out of town through
August 6", visiting relatives. Mr. Steadman assured him the apartment would still be available
upon his retum. On August 7, 2003, Dexter called Mr. Steadman and Mr. Steadman told Dexter
that he would show him the apartment later that afternoon. However, Mr. Steadman never

showed up to let Dexter see the apartment.

16. On August 8, 2003, Dexter placed another call to Mr. Steadman, inquiring about the
first floor apartment. Mr. Steadman told Dexter that a maintenance worker in the building had
keys that Dexter could use to view the apartment. Dexter examined the vacant first floor
apartment and promptly called Steadman Realty to inform them that he wanted to rent the unit.

Unfortunately, Mr. Steadman had already departed for the day.

17. On August 11, 2003, Mr. Steadman called Dexter and scheduled a meeting with
him at Dexter’s apartment. During the meeting, Mr. Steadman expressed disapproval over
Dexter’s housekeeping. Dexter disagreed that his housekeeping was objectionable and reiterated

his need for a first floor apartment due to his vision disability. Mr. Steadman refused his request.

18. Following Mr. Steadman’s refusal to rent Dexter the first floor apartment, Dexter
stated that he would alternatively be amenable to an accommodation in the form of a guide dog,
to assist him in ambulating up and down the stairs. Mr. Steadman referred Dexter to a section of
Dexter’s apartment lease prohibiting tenants from keeping dogs at the Property and denied this

request as well,


29. Throughout the relevant period, Defendant knew about Dexter’s disability. The
Defendant was also aware that Dexter’s disability caused him great difficulty and stress when

entering and exiting his residence.

30. Rather than agreeing to accommodate Dexter’s disability in a reasonable fashion,
the Defendant increased Dexter’s rent and refused to renew his lease on an annualized basis,
limiting him to a month-to-month tenancy. The month-to-month tenancy allows the Defendant
to terminate Dexter’s lease without cause on 30-days notice. In addition, this lease term enables
the Defendant to carry out his alleged threat to terminate Dexter’s lease following the conclusion

of these legal proceedings.

COUNT I
FAILURE TO PROVIDE A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN

VIOLATION OF THE FAIR HOUSING ACT (42 U.S.C, §3604(f))

31. Plaintiff re-alleges paragraphs 1-29 of this Complaint and incorporates them by

reference as though fully set forth herein.
32. Plaintiff is an aggrieved person under Section 802(i) of the Fair Housing Act, 42

U.S.C. §3602(i).

33.  Dexter’s permanent, legal and industrial blindness is a handicap as that term is

defined in the Fair Housing Act 42 U.S.C. 3601 et. seq. and relevant regulations.

34. As arresult of his disability, Dexter requires an accommodation in order to be able

to use and enjoy his dwelling.

35. Defendant and its agents, with full knowledge of the importance of a safe and

secure dwelling and safe ingress and egress from such dwelling, refused to make such an



1
|| || | INTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION man ¥ 5 2004 Cf
bj MICMLEL W. DOBBINS
DEXTER SAFFRLE } CLENA. U.S DISTRICT COURT
| Plaintiff, ) Case No. 03-CV-7283
v. | )
ata ) The Honorable Joan B. Gottschall
STEADMAN RE ALTY COMPANY, )
j ) The Honorable Ian H. Levin,
Wy ) Magistrate Judge
ri};a.# -cDefendant. )
Viral
{ fi:
NOTICE OF FILING
| NOTICE OF FILING DOCKETED
i MAR 0 8 2004
TO: JohnB ey
ROSEN] , MURPHEY & COBLENTZ
30 Northy lle Street
Chicago, 1s 60602
ee
| j
| PLEASE) TAKE NOTICE that on March 5, 2004, the undersigned caused to be filed with
the United States Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, the FIRST ~
AMENDED COM LAINT, a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby served upon you.
! 1 i Ae
i |
| ; Respectfully submitted,
ai Ole athe, Vall Sorrtnel
| One of Plaintiff's Attomeys
hy |
Mare Kadish ||| ||
Heather O’ Farrell Townsend
MAYER, FROWN, ROWE & MAW
190 South) LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illini 06 03.
(312) 782,06 {



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Heather O. Townsend, an attorney, hereby certify that I caused a copy of the foregoing
Notice of Filing, together with a copy of the FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT to be served
by messenger delivery upon the following before 5:00 p.m. on March 5, 2004:

13153324.1 030504 1111C 04241867

Mr. John B. Murphey

ROSENTHAL, MURPHEY & COBLENTZ
30 NORTH LASALLE STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60602

Weblo Ci! Ioreud

Heather O. Townsend



WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against the
Defendant for compensatory and punitive damages, court filing fees, declaratory and injunctive
relief, and such other relief this Court finds just and proper under the circumstances.

JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues so triable.

Date: March 5, 2004 DEXTER SAFFOLD

Marc Kadish (ARDC #1378872)
Heather O’Farrell Townsend (ARDC #6256469)

MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP
190 South LaSalle Street

Chicago, Mlinois 60603-3441

(312) 782-0600

Attorneys for DEXTER SAFFOLD, the Plaintiff



24, That same month, Dexter also contacted the United States Department of Housing

and Urban Development (“HUD”). HUD continues to investigate this matter.

25.  Asaresult of the Defendant’s actions, Dexter suffered considerable psychological
and emotional injury. Dexter fears for his health and safety on a daily basis as he is forced to
navigate the numerous stairs between his apartment and the ground floor. Dexter also fears for
his health and safety in the event of an emergency, such as a fire, that would force him to use the

back staircase, which is unlit and in disrepair.

Cc. Defendants’ Retaliation Against Dexter
26. On September 22, 2003, approximately a month after Dexter’s first request for a

reasonable accommodation, Dexter received notice of an increase in his monthly rent.

27. Subsequently, in October of 2003, following the filing of Dexter’s complaint with
the Northern District of Illinois, Dexter contacted Mr. Steadman to inquire about renewing his
lease. Mr. Steadman told Dexter that (i) he would not receive a leasing agreement and (ii)
Dexter’s lease was no longer renewable on an annual basis, but instead would be renewed on a

month-to-month term.

28. Mr. Steadman further informed Dexter that this change in the term was a direct
result of Dexter filing a legal complaint against Mr. Steadman. Upon information and belief, Mr.
Steadman has renewed the leases of other tenants on an annual basis and not on a month-to-
month basis. In addition, upon information and belief, Mr. Steadman told others that he did not

want Dexter living in the dwelling following the resolution of the pending litigation.


7. 42 U.S.C. 3604(f)(3)(B) states that discrimination against a handicapped individual
includes: “a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services,
when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and

enjoy a dwelling.”

8. 42 U.S.C. §3617 provides that it is unlawful to “coerce, intimidate, threaten, or
interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having exercised
and enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or
enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by section 803, 804, 805, or 806 [42 U.S.C. §§

3603, 3604, 3605, or 3606].”

9. 24 CFR Part 100, entitled “Discriminatory Conduct under the Fair Housing Act” states
that under Section 100.24, a reasonable accommodation may be illustrated by the following

example:

Example (1): A blind applicant for rental housing wants to live in a dwelling unit
with a seeing eye dog. The building has a “no pets” policy. It is a violation of
§100.24 for the owner or manager of the apartment complex to refuse to permit
the applicant to live in the apartment with a seeing eye dog because, without the
seeing eye dog, the blind person will not have an equal opportunity to use and
enjoy a dwelling.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
A. Dexter Saffold’s Physical Handicaps.
10. Dexter suffers from diabetes. As a result of this disease, he developed open angle
glaucoma. This eye condition greatly restricts his general field of vision, limits his left and right
eye vision to 20/400 and renders him permanently, legally and industrially blind. Dexter’s legal

blindness results from irreversible and permanent tissue damage that greatly impairs his ability to



JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This Court has jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. §3613(a) due to the discrimination

alleged in violation of federal housing law.

3. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b) as a substantial

part of the events and omissions giving rise to Plaintiff's claims occurred in this District.

THE PARTIES

4, Plaintiff Dexter Saffold, was and is a resident of the State of Illinois. He has

resided at 3143 West 60" Street, 3" Floor, Chicago, IL, 60629 since October 31, 2002.

5. Defendant Steadman Realty Company was and is an Ilinois corporation that
owned and managed the building located at 3143 West 60" Street, Chicago, IL, 60629 (the
“Property”) during the time period relevant to Plaintiff's claims. The offices of Steadman Realty
are located at 6247 S. Pulaski, Chicago, IL 60629. Upon information and belief, Mr. Steadman
served as the president and owner of Steadman Realty at all times relevant to this Complaint. In
addition, Mr. Steadman was the record owner of the Property and served as Dexter’s primary

contact with Steadman Realty at all times relevant to this Complaint.
STATUTORY LANGUAGE

6. 42 U.S.C. §3602(h) defines a “handicap”, with respect to a person, as: “(1) a physical
or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person’s major life
activities, (2) a record of having such an impairment, (3) being regarded as having such an

impairment.”


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ‘
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS MAR © 5 2004 CM

EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL W. DOBBINS

DEXTER SAFFOLD, ) CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
)
Plaintiff, ) Case No. 03-CV-7283
v. )
) The Honorable Joan B. Gottschall
STEADMAN REALTY COMPANY, )
) The Honorable Ian H. Levin,
) Magistrate Judge
ers
Defendant. ) B Ok ETE
MAR 0 8 2004

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Dexter Saffold (“Plaintiff or “Dexter”), by and through his attorneys Mayer,
Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP, complains of and against Defendant Steadman Realty Company
(‘“Defendant” or “Steadman Realty”) as follows:

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. Plaintiff Dexter Saffold brings this action against Defendant Steadman Realty,
seeking redress for Steadman Realty’s refusal to make reasonable accommodations to its policies
and practices on account of Dexter’s physical disability. Steadman Realty’s actions denied
Dexter of an equal opportunity to use and enjoy his dwelling, in direct violation of 42 U.S.C.
§3604. In addition, Steadman Realty coerced, interfered with and intimidated Dexter in
connection with the exercise of his fair housing rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3617. Dexter
seeks damages resulting from Steadman Realty’s unlawful conduct, including compensatory and
punitive damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, and any other relief this Court deems just

and proper.


4

= EE ‘CASE
: FILE FOR
be | XHIBITS ©

wick sil tn see nd i nie isn dt nis nn nies hima: eta in ci s. <n li ae