Smith v. ANCHOR BUILDING CORPORATION
This text of 397 F. Supp. 256 (Smith v. ANCHOR BUILDING CORPORATION) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Brenda SMITH, Plaintiff,
v.
ANCHOR BUILDING CORPORATION, Defendant.
United States District Court, E. D. Missouri, E. D.
Samuel H. Liberman, Liberman, Baron & Toldsteon, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Larry B. Luber and John P. Emde, Armstrong, Teasdale, Kramer & Vaughan, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
WANGELIN, District Judge.
This action is before the Court for a decision on the merits following the trial to the Court sitting without a jury.
This action was brought by the plaintiff, Brenda Smith, against the defendant, a corporation, for alleged violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 3604 for racial discrimination in the rental of housing. Plaintiff seeks actual damages, punitive damages and attorney's fees.
The Court being fully apprised of the premises hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Findings of Fact
1. Plaintiff is a Negro female, and defendant is a Missouri corporation.
2. The Park Ridge Apartments are located in St. Louis County, Missouri, and the complex consists of several apartment buildings with attendant recreational facilities of swimming pools, tennis courts and basketball courts.
3. Plaintiff resided with her parents in early 1973. At that time she decided that she would move into an apartment of her own later in the year. The plaintiff visited the Park Ridge Apartments, inspected the display apartment and conversed with persons concerning the prospective rental of an apartment. Defendant's agents were advised by plaintiff that she did not desire an apartment immediately, but that she would like occupancy in June of 1973. At that time the plaintiff was advised that it was unnecessary for her to complete an application due to the substantial time interval between that date and her desired date of occupancy.
4. The evidence clearly shows that the Park Ridge Apartments has a very high rate of occupancy, and that the average time between removal of one tenant and occupancy by another is approximately two days due to the management's goal of a high occupancy rate.
5. On March 4, 1973, the plaintiff submitted a written application for an apartment, which was admitted into evidence as Defendant's Exhibit B, and stated that she desired a one bedroom, second floor apartment available around the 1st of June, 1973. After plaintiff completed the application, she made other visits and/or telephone calls to the *257 Apartments concerning her anticipated occupancy.
6. At an uncertain time prior to Friday, June 22, 1973, the plaintiff contacted the apartment rental office and was advised that her apartment was not yet available. The plaintiff then contacted Miss Virginia Polens of the Monsanto Company Housing Office, plaintiff's employer, and requested her to assist plaintiff in obtaining an apartment at Park Ridge Apartments.
7. The Park Ridge Apartments are managed by a resident manager. During the time period in question, a resident Manager worked six days a week with Friday as her day off. The defendant employed a relief Manager whose duty was to work a different day at different apartment sites owned by the defendant to replace the resident managers on those managers' day off. The defendant had employed a new relief Manager on Friday, June 22, 1973. That day was the first day on which the relief Manager had worked at the Park Ridge Apartments.
8. On June 22, 1973, Virginia Polens, of the Monsanto Company Housing Office, at the request of the plaintiff, telephoned Park Ridge Apartments to inquire as to the availability of an apartment. Miss Polens testified she was advised that an apartment was available but that she did not request that the apartment be held for the plaintiff, nor did she testify that at any time she discussed with any representative of defendant, plaintiff, Brenda Smith; nor her application; nor the availability of an apartment for plaintiff. Miss Polens merely inquired as to whether or not an apartment was available. Miss Polens then told the plaintiff that she, Miss Polens, had been advised that an apartment was available.
9. After working hours on the evening of June 22, 1973, plaintiff, Brenda Smith, went to the Park Ridge Apartments and inquired as to whether or not an apartment was available. Upon arrival, the plaintiff apparently talked with the relief Manager and was told that her apartment was not available.
10. Plaintiff, Brenda Smith, then contacted an organization known as St. Louis Freedom of Residence, and talked to its Executive Director, Mrs. Hedy Epstein. On Monday, June 25, 1973, Mrs. Epstein sent a white law student, Mr. Terrence Irion, to the Park Ridge Apartments for the purpose of making an application for an apartment. Mr. Irion made an application, wrote a fifty dollar ($50.00) personal check for a deposit, and was told that he could have apartment 1363-G. Mr. Irion left the apartment complex, and immediately stopped payment on that check, and at no time had any intention of renting an apartment.
11. The defendant intended to lease apartment 1349-O to the plaintiff. This apartment was available for occupancy by plaintiff, Brenda Smith, on June 28, 1973. On that date, the defendant called the plaintiff to advise her that the apartment was available and requested her to come in and make the security deposit. Plaintiff then advised the defendant that she, Brenda Smith, could not come in until after work and the defendant made special arrangements for the Manager to remain subsequent to normal closing hours. The plaintiff advised the defendant that she would come to the apartment to make the deposit, but never appeared. The apartment was held by defendant until at least July 1, 1973, at which time defendant called plaintiff to again request her to make the security deposit. Plaintiff was not home, and plaintiff's mother said she knew nothing about the apartment rental, except that she would give plaintiff the message. The defendant had no further communications from Brenda Smith until her attorney called defendant's attorney on a date which is not in evidence. On July 12, 1973, plaintiff filed this action against the defendant.
12. Regarding the availability of apartments for rent in the Park Ridge *258 Apartments complex, the only evidence in the record indicates that:
Apartment 1363-G was vacated on June 4, 1973, and was left by the previous tenant in extremely poor condition. Prior to the departure of the tenant in 1363-G, the defendant's office had received communications from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the St. Louis Police Department Intelligence Unit, and the Internal Revenue Service, requesting the defendant to advise each of the foregoing agencies in the event that apartment 1363-G was vacated. The defendant notified the foreging agencies upon removal of the tenant, and, at the request of the agencies, placed a "hold" on the apartment which was so maintained until further notification to defendant by the agencies. At some time the morning of June 25, 1973, the resident Manager of Park Ridge Apartments, Debbie Downing, received a telephone call from the main corporate office of the defendant notifying her that the hold had been released, and that therefore the apartment was now available for renting as soon as it could be cleaned up.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
397 F. Supp. 256, 1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-anchor-building-corporation-moed-1975.