<p> SYLLABUS: UNIT ONE Numbers in parentheses refer to pages in the course materials. Numbers preceded by SS refer to pages in the Statutory Supplement.</p><p>UNIT I. PROOF OF INTENTIONAL DISCRIMINATION</p><p>A. The Structure of the Statutes 1. Kramarsky v. Stahl Management (N.Y. Sup. 1977) (1-2) 2. Discussion Questions 1-2 (2) 3. 42 U.S.C. §3604 (SS4-5) 4. 42 U.S.C. §1982 (SS1)</p><p>B. Direct Proof 1. Introduction to Proof Issues (2-3) 2. Private Defendants a. Sorenson v. Raymond (5th Cir. 1976) (3-6) b. Discussion Questions 3-5 (6) c. Marable v. H.Walker & Assoc. (5th Cir. 1981) (6-12) d. Discussion Questions 6-7 (12) 3. Government Defendants a. Discussion Questions 8-9 (12) b. Scott-Harris v. City of Fall River (1st Cir. 1997) (13-16) c. Resident Advisory Bd. v. Rizzo (3d Cir. 1977) (16-26) d. Discussion Questions 10-13 (27) e. Discussion Problem A (27-29)</p><p>C. The McDonnell-Douglas Burden Shift 1. Overview of the Burden-Shift (29-31) 2. Cases Applying the Burden Shift a. Asbury v. Brougham (10th Cir. 1989) (31-36) b. Discussion Questions 14-16 (36) c. Frazier v. Rominger (2d Cir. 1994) (37-41) d. Discussion Questions 17-18 (41) e. Pinchback v. Armistead Homes Corp. (4th Cir. 1990) (41-45) f. Discussion Questions 19-23 (46) 3. Aside: The Legislative Process (Dialogue Between Courts and Legislatures) a. Eskridge & Frickey, How a Bill Becomes Federal Law (46-52) b. Note: Dialogue Between Courts and Legislatures (52-56) 4. Statutory Interpretation Problem: Mixed Motives a. Note: The Special Problem of Mixed Motives (56-57) b. 42 U.S.C. §§2000e-2(m) & 2000e-5(g) (SS1-2) c. Cato v. Jilek (N.D.Ill. 1991) (57-63) d. Discussion Questions 24-29 (63-64) 5. Discussion Problem B = Group Discussion Problem #2 (64) Unit II: Examples of Discriminatory Conduct (Beyond Denial of Housing)</p><p>A. Discriminatory Advertising 1. Statutes and Regulations a. 42 U.S.C. §3604(c) (SS4) b. 24 CFR §100.75 (SS14)</p><p>2. Caselaw & Questions a. Ragin v. The N.Y. Times Co. (2d Cir. 1991) (65-71) b. Discussion Questions 30-36 (71-72) c. Saunders v. General Services Corp. (E.D.Vir. 1987) (72-80) d. Discussion Questions 37-40 (80) e. Group Discussion Problem #3 (81)</p><p>3. Discussion Problem C (81-83)</p><p>B. Interference, Intimidation & Coercion 1. The §3617 Cause of Action a. Four Verbs i) 42 U.S.C. §§3617, 3631 (SS8) ii) 24 CFR §100.400 (SS20) iii) Definitions of the §3617 Verbs (84) iv) Discussion Questions 41-42 (84) v) Salisbury House v. McDermott (E.D. Penn. 1998) (84-91) vi) Gourlay v. Forest Lakes Estates Civic Ass’n (M.D. 2003) [Background & Legal Analysis §D] (91-94, 98-100) vii) Discussion Question 43 (101)</p><p> b. Relation to §§3603-3606 i) Frazier v. Rominger (2d Cir. 1994) (101-02) ii) Stirgus v. Benoit (N.D. Ill. 1989) (102-04) iii) Wilkey v. Pyramid Construction Co. (D. Conn. 1985) (104-05) iv) Discussion Questions 44-47 (105)</p><p>2. Economic Interference a. Michigan Prot’n & Advocacy Serv. v. Babin (6th Cir. 1994) (106-11) b. U.S. v. Hughes (D. Neb. 1994) (111-12) c. Discussion Questions 48-51 (112-13)</p><p>3. Liability for Post-Acquisition Discriminatory Acts a. Gourlay v. Forest Lakes Estates Civic Ass’n (M.D. 2003) [Legal Analysis §§ABC] (94-98) b. U.S. v. Koch (D. Neb. 2004) (113-22) c. Discussion Questions 52-54 (123) </p>