Resort That Refused Black Family Pool Access Must Pay

US News ^ | 8/11/05

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

An extended African-American family, most of whom reside in Maryland, today announce the settlement of their discrimination claim against a vacation rental condominium resort in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, which barred them from using its swimming pool. Among other things, the settlement of the complaint filed by the Lawyers' Committee and the law firm of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, provides the plaintiffs with monetary compensation, the amount of which cannot be disclosed under the agreement.

Over 100 African-American family members alleged that they were racially discriminated against when they stayed at Baytree III, part of the Baytree Plantation in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for the Turner-Gray family reunion in July 2001. The plaintiffs alleged that shortly after they arrived for their family reunion weekend, Stuart Jenkins, property manager of Baytree III and president of the Homeowners' Association, padlocked and chained the entrance to the pool area closing it off to the reunion attendees. According to the complaint, the day after the reunion ended, Jenkins removed the padlock and chain and reopened the pool to guests, personally inviting white guests to use the pool during their stay.

"We selected Baytree as the site for our reunion in part because of its amenities, including the pool facilities," stated Gloria Turner-Simpkins, one of the plaintiffs who organized the family reunion. "But instead of being able to enjoy them, because of these discriminatory actions, we were humiliated and saddened, during what was meant to be an enjoyable family gathering," added Mrs. Turner-Simpkins.

In addition to monetary compensation, the Homeowners' Association agreed to issue a written apology to the family members, to conduct fair housing training for individuals involved in the day-today management of Baytree III, and to inform its members of its policy of non-discrimination.

"This settlement makes clear that such racist behavior and such blatant disregard for the law will not be tolerated," stated Charles Lester, a partner in the Atlanta office of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP and one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs.

"It is sad but true that in this day and age there are still those who want to stop African Americans from enjoying the same privileges as everyone else," said Barbara Arnwine, Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "While no amount of money can make these family members whole for the racist acts they had to endure and to explain to their small children, this settlement does give them some measure of justice."

[ExitPurgamentum]

Depends on what the rules of the homeowners' association are.

No, that is covered under the limited rights that the owners themselves have.

I doubt ANY assocation would allow more than 100 'renters' crowded into a few condos to overwhelm their facilities.

Exactly. But note that the owners have no right to do that either.

[MEGoody]

No, that is covered under the limited rights that the owners themselves have.

Only if the homeowner's association allows reassignment of rights to renters. The agreement between a homeowner and the association would generally rule. (Seems like the judge overstepped his bounds here, but if he doesn't understand contract law, it's not a surprise.)

But note that the owners have no right to do that either.

However, it seems the owners DID rent to a huge crowd. If they weren't supposed to, I would hope the association would go after the owners to recoup any costs associated with this lawsuit filed by the renters.