Summary
The Ninth Circuit upheld liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1982 for racial discrimination in the rental of office space at a motel. It affirmed the compensatory and punitive damages awards and Abbie Phiffer’s standing to sue, but vacated and remanded the attorney’s fee award for further consideration. The court also awarded appellate attorney’s fees to the plaintiffs.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Phiffers established a prima facie case of racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1982.
- Whether Abbie Phiffer had standing to sue under § 1982.
- Whether the compensatory damages awards were excessive or based on clearly erroneous findings.
- Whether the evidence supported the punitive damages award.
- Whether the attorney's-fee award was supported by the evidence.
Holdings
- A plaintiff establishes a prima facie § 1982 discrimination case by showing that the plaintiff is a member of a racial minority, applied for and was qualified to rent or purchase property, was rejected, and that the opportunity remained available thereafter. Racially discriminatory intent is not an element of the prima facie case; racial impact is sufficient at that stage.
- Discriminatory conduct by a rental agent is attributable to the owner of a motel, apartment complex, or other public housing facility, and the owner's duty to comply with racial-discrimination laws is nondelegable.
- Abbie Phiffer had standing because the record established injury in fact and but-for causation sufficient to satisfy Article III's case-or-controversy requirement.
- The compensatory damages awards were supported by the evidence and were not excessive.
- Actual malice or ill will is not required for punitive damages in a racial-discrimination case; punitive damages may be supported by conduct undertaken with conscious and deliberate disregard of its consequences and that is wanton.
- The attorney's-fee award had to be vacated and remanded because the record contained no evidence supporting the amount awarded. The district court was also required to determine and award a reasonable appellate fee.
Key quotations
“Racial motivation is not an element of the § 1982 prima facie case; only a racial impact need be shown.” (¶ 21)
“The duty of the owner of such a facility to obey the laws relating to racial discrimination is non-delegable.” (¶ 24)
“Actual malice, however, is unnecessary to support an award of punitive damages in racial discrimination cases.” (¶ 31)
Factual background
Lester Phiffer, a Black insurance agent, sought to rent advertised office space at the Proud Parrot Motor Hotel and was told the space would be held for him until the next morning. When he and his wife returned with a deposit, they were told the office was unavailable, although a Caucasian applicant was shown and allowed to deposit money on the same office the next day. The Phiffers later rented a more expensive office elsewhere, and the magistrate found that the discrimination caused business losses, emotional distress, and humiliation.
Procedural history
The Phiffers sued in federal district court alleging racial discrimination in the refusal to rent office space, under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 3601 et seq. By stipulation, the case was tried to a magistrate. The magistrate found a § 1982 violation, awarded damages and attorney's fees, and found Title VIII inapplicable to the rental of office space from a hotel. The district court adopted the findings. The Ninth Circuit affirmed liability and compensatory and punitive damages, but vacated and remanded the attorney's-fee award for determination of the proper amount and directed the district court to award a reasonable appellate fee.
Remand instructions
The judgment was affirmed as to liability and the compensatory and punitive damages awards. The attorney's-fee award was vacated and remanded for the district court to determine the proper amount under Fountila v. Carter. The district court was also directed to determine and award a reasonable appellate fee to the plaintiffs. Appellants were assessed the costs of the appeal.