Lee v. Walnut Garden Apartments, Inc.

387 A.2d 875, 479 Pa. 142, 1978 Pa. LEXIS 700

• Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
• Decided: June 5, 1978
• Docket: 136
• Status: Published

Opinions

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (Commission), appeals from a decision of the Commonwealth Court holding (1) the Commission has no power to award victims of unlawful discrimination damages for “embarrassment, humiliation and emotional upset,” and (2) the Commission may not order a respondent to maintain records which designate the race of apartment applicants or the race of the apartment’s former occupant because such a requirement violates § 5(h)(6) of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 P.S. § 955(h)(6) (Supp.1977-78). Span v. Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, 15 Pa.Cmwlth. 334, 325 A.2d 678 (1974).

This Court has recently held that the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission has no authority to award damages for injuries such as mental anguish and humiliation which allegedly result from unlawful discrimination. Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission v. Zamantakis, 478 Pa. 454, 387 A.2d 70 (1978); Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission v. Straw, 478 Pa. 463, 387 A.2d 75 (1978). Accordingly, we affirm that part of the Commonwealth Court’s order denying the Commission the authority to award damages for embarrassment, humiliation, and emotional upset.

We do not agree with the Commonwealth Court’s order that the Commission may not, as a remedial measure, order a respondent to maintain records of the racial identification of applicants for an apartment or the former occupants of a vacated apartment unit. The Commonwealth Court’s order in the present case was entered before this Court’s decision in Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission v. Chester Housing Authority, 458 Pa. 67, 327 A.2d 335 (1974), in which we upheld a nearly identical order requiring reports containing information of racial composition. The Commission, statutorily empowered to “take such affirmative action ... as, in the judgment of the Commission, will effectuate the purposes of [the Human Relations Act],” 43 P.S. § 959 (Supp.1977-78), could have concluded that such a reporting requirement was necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Human Relations Act.

We therefore reverse that portion of the Commonwealth Court’s decision invalidating the Commission’s order which requires respondent’s records to indicate the racial composition of applicants for apartments and the former occupants of apartments. We affirm the Commonwealth Court’s order denying the Commission the authority to award the compensatory damages sought in this case.

It is so ordered.

MANDERINO, J., filed a concurring and dissenting opinion. ROBERTS, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which NIX, J., joined.