Oxford House (D) opened a group home in the City of Edmonds (P). The house was located in a residential neighborhood and was for 10 to 12 adults recovering from alcoholism and drug addiction. D issued criminal and civil citations against the owner. D's ordinance defined a family as an individual or two or more persons related by genetics, adoption, marriage, or a group of five or fewer person who were not related by genetics, adoption, or marriage. D opposed the citations under the Fair Housing Act 102 Stat. 1619, 42 U.S.C. Section 3601; unlawful to discriminate to a buyer or renter because of a handicap. D asked P to make a reasonable accommodation and P refused. P then sued D for a declaration that the FHA did not prohibit P’s ordinance. D claimed that P failed to make reasonable accommodations for handicapped persons. All parties conceded that the occupants of D were handicapped. P however, relied upon FHA exceptions that allowed any reasonable restrictions regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling. The District Court ruled that the city ordinance defining a family was exempt from the handicap FHA clauses. The Ninth Circuit reversed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.