discrimination suit: “live with your people”
By Guest Contributor Angry Asian Man, originally published at Angry Asian Man
In New York, a woman is suing a Flushing Queens co-op board for trying to force her and her family out of their apartment building because she’s Chinese: Woman sues co-op for saying: Live with your people.
Lisa Sheen says board members at her building have made her life miserable, both directly and indirectly, since she purchased a sixth-floor unit for herself and her family in December 2004. At one point, they actually said that she should “live with her people”:
They waited months after she applied for an apartment to schedule her interview and then stonewalled her mortgage company until she lost its financing offer, according to legal papers.
When Sheen raised the money with the help of her employer, a real estate company, board members took a more active approach – telling her boss “to convince me to leave the building and move to the Chinese part of town,” she claims.
Boss Steve Silverberg wrote in a sworn affidavit that board members approached him during a visit to Sheen in February. They asked if he was Jewish, which he said he was. They told him “as a Jew, I should understand [that Sheen] should live with her people … in the Chinese area,” he said in legal papers.
When she filed papers for an apartment, the board was apparently already being sued by a tenant for racial discrimination against Asians. That case is still pending in Queens Supreme Court. The board countersued Sheen for $9 million for defamation and libel. That suit was dismissed. That’s racist!
–
Photo credit: New York Daily News
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
Marcy Webb wrote:
I read that the board wanted to evict Mrs. Sheen and her family from the apartment because she made, according to them, unauthorized renovations. However, that is a separate issue from being told, “go and live with your people”, on the basis of race. If Mrs. Sheen did in fact make unauthorized renovations, then, she needs to be held accountable, per the apartment association’s regulations. But, she doesn’t deserve to be harrassed, on the basis of race/ethnicity, or anything else.
I guess the folks on the board were never told that “you people” and variations thereof, is not the thing to say to people of color. Apparently, they never read the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 8:56 am ¶
Naturally Leslie wrote:
This is so blatantly, disgustingly racist, it makes me sick to my stomach. I hope she wipes them out!
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 9:12 am ¶
N wrote:
Amazing. Depressing, distressing and amazing.
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 9:40 am ¶
GueraLola wrote:
Good for her for suing, plus with today’s economy people being kicked out because of lack of jobs and something like this comes up. That’s disgusting.
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 10:15 am ¶
t. allen-mercado wrote:
As soon as I recognized the buildings from the photo I knew it was Queens! Although one of the most diverse cities in New York- as a native, I can tell you that within that rich diversity lies some very serious discrimination.
I remember looking for my first apartment after leaving home and thinking what a double whammy our interracial relationship is for apartment hunting!
This has been an ongoing epidemic for as far back as I can remember, I really hope Ms. Sheen’s lawsuit brings the issues of housing discrimination to the forefront and exposes it for the ugly practice that it is.
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 12:40 pm ¶
Trey wrote:
there’s already been a decision. The board wasn’t found to guilty of racism, but they were ordered to bay 250,000(?).
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 2:58 pm ¶
Kaonashi wrote:
I can’t see how they could possibly find this board not guilty on the basis of discrimination. I mean, there really isn’t any ambiguity you can take with a statement like “go live with your own kind.”
On the other hand, co-ops make it clear on what sort of renovations are acceptable in units (some allow it up to a certain extent, some don’t allow it at all, and some only allow cosmetic upgrades like paint, kitchen upgrades, etc but don’t allow anything that will alter the structure of the unit) so if she did make some unauthorized changes she can be held accountable for it.
This is why I hate co-ops. :/
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 4:54 pm ¶
Minotaar wrote:
Co-op boards are filled with ignorant busy-bodies who do nothing but make trouble for other people because they have a desperate need to have personal power. They make stupid rules and enforce them arbitrarily. The whole situation can go to ridiculous extremes, and in the ny area it really does.
I recently moved into a co-op and they force you to move on weekdays between 1-5pm. If you dont finish moving by 5pm, tough shit. I had to take my stuff and pack it back into the truck, then desperately find a storage facility nearby, then wait over the weekend and move again on Monday. All because some one made some rule that was enforced arbitrarily.
On top of this, co-ops get into the most retarded litigation imaginable. In a co-op I used to occupy, the penthouse occupant had a mold problem (because of an unmaintained roof) and the the co-op refused to fix it. So they went to court over health damages by the mold and for their penthouse. The co-op finally won but had lawyers fees in excess of a million dollars, and then the township forced them to repair the damage anyway. All of these costs are bourne by the occupants of the building as long as a majority agree with the board. But no one has time to care what is going on with the board so this retarded stuff continues.
Do yourself a favor and never move into a co-op
Posted 03 Jul 2009 at 6:26 pm ¶
sandeep wrote:
i had something like this said to me once, by a friend. not quite the same way, but the “your people” was used. essentially the insinuation was perhaps i’d enjoy “my people” more.
i mean i know you all probably already have very clear notions on why this is wrong, but i feel the need to elaborate anyway. my people? well if you’re talking about the human race, sure. but beyond that, skin color has no bearing on grey matter. grey matter means everything, persona, beliefs, traditions. what have you. anything a person might be expected to do, or even be observed doing, is not dependant on skin color. that goes for any other physical attribute or manifestation on the human frame. it has no bearing on grey matter. none, whatsoever.
Posted 06 Jul 2009 at 10:17 am ¶
Eva wrote:
That building looks like crap. They should be glad anybody would want to live there. It looks like a tenement with the fire escapes.
Posted 06 Jul 2009 at 11:08 am ¶
RJG wrote:
As a source for what @Trey said, here’s the article:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/07/02/2009-07-02_jury_says_no_racism_yet_awards_asian_225g.html
The jury didn’t find that she was a victim of racism, but that she was a victim of unfair double-standards, so they awarded her $225k.
I kinda get it, because I think verbally said things are harder to prove/validate than things written/recorded/etc, but I kinda also think that it’s crap.
Posted 06 Jul 2009 at 11:18 am ¶
RCHOUDH wrote:
Wow I can’t believe such bigoted housing practices occurred in NYC! And I agree that building doesn’t look so special why’s the housing board acting like they’re living on 5th Avenue??
Posted 07 Jul 2009 at 8:36 pm ¶
funguy wrote:
Why can’t there be bigotry in NYC? It’s as if New Yorkers think there is an anti-bigotry magnetic shield that exists around the city.
Posted 11 Jul 2009 at 4:56 pm ¶
Emollience wrote:
The statement ‘go live with your own kind’ is very humiliating and possess the colouration of discrimination.
At this stage of human pursuit of universality of human rights and collective global pursuit to achieve peace, harmony and development; and the need to eliminate disharmony, discord, hatred, rioting and terrorism.
The offensive statement if directed to a group can occassion violent reactions and disturbance of public order.
It very anachronistic, in this twenty first century to imagine persons applying such statements to fellow human beings. The statement is an affront to the concept of equality and social justice. It is a segregative statement that suggests ignorance.
There is need to educate people about the catastrophic effect of such arrogant and illegal statements.
The statement is unguarded, it suggests flippancy and ineptitude; otherwise the maker of the statement would have known that is now currently subhuman to apply such debasing statements.
Had it been the statement is made in the presence of the victim only, I would have suggested that the court should declare the statements discriminatory and illegal only.
If the offensive statement is made in the presence of others and confirmed upon adducement of evidence; then the victim should be entitled to simple damages or what is known as compensation, to deter the maker and others and to dignify humanity.
The particulars of damages will be : ridicule, odioum and opprobrium.
Award of damages amounts to positive contribution to the need to restore the dignity of mankind.
Akinola Olufemi Kinoshi.
The Initiator.
Posted 09 Sep 2009 at 10:45 am ¶