Rule against children playing on grass leads to $80K payout

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, a Fremont, Calif. apartment building’s rule against children’s playing in grassy common areas amounted to “family status” discrimination. Resulting settlement: $80,000. [DoJ complaint, press release]


  • The good guys won here.

    Next, the DoJ should go after busybodies who harass children minding their own business in parks.

  • >The good guys won here.

    Unless you believe in property rights for owners of apartment complexes, or even in market sorting of tenants between those who have higher or lesser aversion to trampled grass.

  • While I don’t believe “the good guys won” because it is an overreach, I would be more persuaded by Mr. Olson’s argument of “non-trampled grass” if the complex had not allowed playing on the grass at all. As it is, a pickup football game between adults were allowed. Wiffle ball games were allowed between adults. Other activities were allowed on the grass.

    It was just kids who could not play on the grass.

    That is not to say that I don’t think the complex has a right to restrict use of areas, but only that I am not sure that “pretty grass” is a compelling reason to justify the restriction.

  • The complex could just charge for the damage, if any, and not evict people when kids play on the grass.

  • For a legal site, a lot of people sure confuse verdict with precedent.