Jonathan Woodner Company - Court Cases

Court Cases

• 1954 - Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Mather., 210 F.2d 868 (D.C. Cir. 1954) Federal Circuits, D.C. Cir. (March 19, 1954)

• 1971 - Jonathan Woodner Co. et al., Appellants, v. Aetna Insurance Company., 442 F.2d 754 (D.C. Cir. 1971) U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Cir. - Argued Sept. 18, 1970.Decided Jan. 11, 1971, Petition for Rehearing Denied Feb. 12, 1971

• 1987 - Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Laufer, 531 A.2d 280, 287 (D.C. 1987)

• 1997 - the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene in a case between developers and former tenants of the Park Tower, a Northwest Washington, DC apartment building. The court let stand a 1990 award of compensatory damages of $965,000 to nine former tenants for forcing residents out in part by allowing the building to deteriorate while the Jonathan Woodner Company and Steven Z. Laufer planned to turn the units into condominiums. A separate $15 million punitive damages award was reversed by a lower court. The case is Jonathan Woodner Co. vs. Breeden.

• 2001 - Youssef v. 3636 Corp. 777 A.2d 787 (D.C. App.2001) - Plaintiff sued 3636 Corporation and Jonathan Woodner Company, the Woodner Apartment building’s owner and manager after they slipped and fell on ice, under the safety of a canopy and on a slip-resistant mat. The trial court found for defendants, holding that plaintiff failed to prove actual or constructive notice of the patch of ice on the mat. The D.C. Court of Appeals reversed, finding that defendants had a duty to “exercise the degree of care which an ordinarily prudent person, in view of existing circumstances, would exercise to avoid injury to a person lawfully using ." The case was remanded for jury determination of whether or not the defendants acted reasonably under the circumstances.

• 2007 - The Equal Rights Center and Ms. S. Boubeau brought suit against the Jonathan Woodner Company for violation of the District of Columbia law that prohibits discrimination based on source of income. The plaintiffs alleged that Woodner refused to accept Housing Choice Vouchers. On April 17, 2008, the Court granted in part and denied in part Woodner’s motion to dismiss, concluding that all of Ms. Bourbeau’s claims survived Woodner’s legal challenges. The Court also concluded that ERC’s claims that Woodner engaged in discriminatory conduct before April 25, 2005 (when ERC’s corporate charter was revoked) did not survive, but ERC’s claims that Woodner engaged in discriminatory conduct after April 25, 2005 (when ERC’s corporate charter was reinstated) did survive. See Bourbeau v. Jonathan Woodner Co., 549 F. Supp. 2d 78 (D.D.C. 2008). On June 2, 2008, before any discovery had taken place, Woodner filed a motion for summary judgment with respect to ERC’s remaining claims. The Court denied Woodner’s motion. The Court said that: “ERC’s claim that Woodner maintained a discriminatory policy after April 25, 2005 is neither vague nor conclusory; it is based on (1) specific factual allegations involving ERC’s 6 testers and Ms. Bourbeau, and (2) the common-sense proposition that if there was an established policy of discrimination in place at the Woodner as late as April 8, 2005 (when Ms. Bourbeau was turned away) it likely remained in place on or after April 25, 2005 (when ERC’s charter was reinstated).” On June 19, 2009, the Court entered an Agreed Order and Settlement Agreement whereby Woodner agreed not to discriminate on the basis of source of income, to implement or strengthen non-discrimination policies at its apartment properties in the District of Columbia, to provide fair housing training to its employees, and to display signs letting potential renters know that Woodner accepts housing choice vouchers. Woodner also agreed to a monetary settlement of $200,000.