United States v. Branella

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that where “plaintiff alleges discrimination as a result of disparate treatment—as opposed to disparate impact—a showing of impermissible intent is pivotal”
• requiring a plaintiff to show that familial status was a motivating factor in the alleged discriminatory action
• unsworn certification made under penalty of “punishment” in a motion for summary judgment insufficient because it did not acknowledge the penalty was perjury
• “Specifically, the FHAA provides that it is unlawful to make a dwelling unavailable to any prospective buyer or renter because of the presence of minor children in the prospective household.”
• “Courts have great discretion in deciding whether to withdraw or amend an admission.”
• no prejudice found where response was merely two weeks late

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).