IBJNews

  • Home

Lawsuit claims builder broke handicapped rights

Associated Press
August 10, 2010
Keywords
Apartments, Construction, Development/Redevelopment, Law, Legal Issues, Real Estate & Retail, Residential Real Estate
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An advocacy group has filed a federal lawsuit in Indianapolis against a builder, saying it designed apartment complexes across the United States that violate the Fair Housing Act.

The suit is against SC Bodner Co., its affiliate MBA Construction and six apartment complex owners.

The National Fair Housing Alliance says 16 Bodner properties in eight states violate the law.

The suit says apartments have inaccessible building entrances, environmental controls beyond the reach-range of wheelchair users, and high thresholds that make it difficult to go from room to room.

SC Bodner, one of the country's largest multifamily developers, was founded in Indianapolis in 1924 by Solomon C. Bodner. His grandson, Steven Bodner, now leads the business as president. Bodner could not be reached for comment on the lawsuit.


ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ

  1. Any "Domestic Partner Registry" is subject to significant fraud just like the recent media investigation showing huge problems with the Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry.

    What prevents people from claiming benefits from more than one employer for more than one "partner"?

    Don't see the HR department conducting sex & committed relationship audits with home visits?

  2. Words cannot adequated express how riduculous this is. How can anyone go from 8.8 million to 29.2 million (thanks for the $4 gas prices by the way)??

  3. As the city is increasing employee costs, lowering insurance coverages, and completely dropping city/county benefit coverage for employed spouses/kids employed elsewhere, they want to start covering homosexual partners, girl/boy friends, and unemployed room mates?

  4. "At the heart of the change, said Speedway executives, is creating an event that is more friendly toward the track’s corporate partners." What about the fan? For the first time in my 15 years going to the track, I was confined to three small, cramped sections of turn 4 on Pole Day. Not enjoyable. Sponsors banners may generate revenue in the short term, but I don't see IMS/IndyCar doing anything to make the product they are selling more desirable. Sponsors only come where the fans are, so seems to me they have to do something to get more fans in the seats before selling advertising space on the walls. And 220 MPH ain't going to do it!

  5. TV ratings anyone? Name a driver that is not Penske or Ganassi? Ads on the turns? "It's a business..." that is the problem. It's racing and they are ruining it. Tony H. is spinning.

ADVERTISEMENT