Gilead elects remittitur after the decision from the second-highest court in our nation reminds municipalities of the costs of discrimination.

 

Washington, D.C. — On September 11, 2024, a final judgment was entered in Gilead Community Services v. Town of Cromwell after the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit largely affirmed the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut’s judgment on August 12, 2024. This decision was a significant and precedent setting ruling that held the Town of Cromwell accountable for its discriminatory actions against a group home for people with mental health disabilities. This judgment will hopefully bring closure and begin healing after a lengthy legal battle to defend the rights of those with disabilities that stretched over seven years. 

 

On April 17, 2017, national civil rights law firm Relman Colfax and the Connecticut Fair Housing Center filed suit on behalf of the Center and Gilead Community Services, which serves individuals with mental health disabilities in Connecticut, against the Town of Cromwell, Connecticut. The complaint alleged that Cromwell and its mayor and town manager violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by engaging in an illegal and concerted campaign to force Gilead to close its group home. 

 

Gilead has served people with mental health disabilities since 1968, and in 2015, it sought to open a six-person home in Cromwell to provide housing and supportive services. Notwithstanding the clear provisions of state law, Cromwell’s Mayor and Town Manager rallied community opposition to keep the Gilead residence from opening in the first place. Thereafter, Cromwell officials misused their authority by threatening Gilead’s funding from the State of Connecticut, issuing a cease and desist order, and wrongfully denying Gilead a local property tax exemption available to non-profit entities.  

The Town of Cromwell additionally exhibited indifference toward the health and safety of the residents when its police officers leaked one of the resident’s sensitive health information to the media and when the police failed to fully investigate an incident of vandalism at the home. 

As a result of these discriminatory actions, Gilead was forced to close the residence in August 2015, incurring substantial monetary losses and having its mission of serving people with disabilities thwarted. Additionally, prospective residents ready for community living were forced to return to institutional settings.

The Second Circuit opinion found that the jury reasonably could conclude that the Town of Cromwell, along with many Town officials, including the Mayor, the Town Manager, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief, the Town Assessor, and the Superintendent of Schools, as well as a significant number of its taxpayers, took steps to drive the planned Gilead group home out of town. 

A trial was held in October of 2021. After seven days, and following the testimony of 17 witnesses, a federal jury found for Gilead on all counts, determining that Cromwell officials’ prolonged and vociferous campaign to close the group home violated the FHA and ADA. The jury found that Cromwell’s discriminatory actions merited one of the largest monetary punitive damages awards ever achieved in such a case: $5 million, in addition to $181,000 in compensatory damages. On May 27, 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Victor Bolden denied the post-trial motions filed by the Town of Cromwell and the Court’s order upheld the jury’s verdict in its entirety.

The Town of Cromwell filed an appeal on September 13, 2022, raising arguments regarding the proper causation standard under the Fair Housing Act, vicarious liability for municipal actors, and the availability and amount of punitive damages. Cromwell argued that municipalities should be exempt from punitive damages under the Fair Housing Act based on the same principles that apply to Section 1983. 

 

On August 12, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected Cromwell’s arguments regarding the causation standard, vicarious liability, and the availability of punitive damages under the Fair Housing Act and affirmed the district court’s ruling on these issues. The Second Circuit held that the FHA unambiguously allows private plaintiffs to seek punitive damages against any defendant, including a municipality. This sends a clear message about the costs of discrimination to municipal leaders and the constituents they represent.

The Second Circuit opinion found that the jury reasonably could conclude that the Town of Cromwell, along with many Town officials, including the Mayor, the Town Manager, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief, the Town Assessor, and the Superintendent of Schools, as well as a significant number of its taxpayers, took steps to drive the planned Gilead group home out of town. 

In reviewing the constitutionality of the jury’s punitive damages award, the Second Circuit emphasized that the highly reprehensible conduct by the Town of Cromwell supports a significant award of punitive damages. The panel determined that an award of $2 million in punitive damages would be sustainable. A $2 million award in punitive damages and $181,000 in compensatory damages remains one of the largest monetary punitive damages awards ever achieved in such a case. The punitive damages ratio of 11:1 in this case is a reflection of the severity of the discrimination endured by Gilead and its clients, and serves as an important reminder to municipalities throughout the country to stand up for the rights of all their residents, including those with disabilities.

 

Gilead filed an election of remittitur and Judge Victor Allen Bolden of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut entered final judgment on September 11, 2024.

 

“The Court’s post-trial rulings upholding the jury’s verdict sends a powerful message that even in the face of prejudice and discrimination, justice can prevail,” said Tara K. Ramchandani, a Partner at Relman Colfax. “The punitive damages awarded in this case and the Second Circuit’s well-reasoned opinion reflect the reprehensibility of the Town’s conduct. We are proud to have represented Gilead and to have vindicated the rights of people with disabilities that deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.”

“This is a victory that has nationwide implications,” said Dan Osborne, CEO of Gilead Community Services. “The reduction in punitive damages does not change the fact that justice prevailed. This is an important ruling for our clients and other individuals with disabilities seeking to live in the communities of their choosing – a premise deeply rooted in the mission and vision of Gilead. This sets a precedent for equity, housing justice, and disability rights.”

“A jury found and the Second Circuit confirmed that there is no place in our community for what the Town of Cromwell did in promoting and acting on groundless hostility against people with disabilities. The Connecticut Fair Housing Center welcomes this moment of accountability for those responsible,” said Greg Kirschner, Executive Director and Legal Director at Connecticut Fair Housing Center.

For more information on Gilead Community Services v. Town of Cromwell, visit here.