Nuisance lawsuits are becoming a major legal issue for sober living home owners and operators.
Well-run sober living homes are a boon to the community.
Overcrowded, poorly maintained homes that offer little in the way of supervision or rule enforcement, however, tend to make the entire sober living industry look bad.
Unfortunately, many people in the United States associate the term “sober living home” with poorly run halfway houses. They believe that all sober living homes are magnets for crime and blight. They believe that any sober living home spells certain doom for neighborhood quality of life and overall community property values. NIMBYism means that many of these neighbors become quite vocal in their opposition of any sober living facility in operation in “their neighborhood.”
Luckily, our government has passed strong laws protecting discrimination against people with a disability - and that includes people who have been diagnosed with Substance Use Disorder. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) gives a certain degree of protection to sober living homes, despite neighborhood objections.
However, there are workarounds.
More and more, we’re seeing local governments - like city and county entities - engaging in harassment campaigns against sober living home residents, owners and operators.
The prime weapon of choice in these harassment campaigns? Nuisance lawsuits.
Today, we’ll look at three examples of how nuisance lawsuits have been used at the local level to obstruct sober living home operations in three states.
Sober Living Home Nuisance Lawsuit in Crown Point, Indiana
Note: We talked about this case in Part 2 of our two part series on “Understanding National Regulations on Sober Living Homes in the United States.” (If you’re interested in the whole series, you can start with Part 1 if you prefer.)
Sober living real estate investors, CapGrow and sober living home operators, Pinnacle Treatment Centers, came under local fire for opening a sober living home in a single-family residential area of Crown Point, Indiana in 2020.
After many neighborhood complaints, the city of Crown Point is seeking an injunction, as well as a judgement, against both entities for zoning code violations. They’re also attempting to sue the sober living home operators for “constituting a nuisance” and “interfering with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property” through their zoning violations.
Like many sober living providers, CapGrow and Pinnacle Treatment Centers argue that typical zoning laws should not apply to sober living home residents, who benefit from living in supportive sober communities in residential settings on account of their disability and, as such, are protected under the ADA.
A recent update on the case shows that the operators submitted a petition to create a zoning variance which would allow for the sober living home to continue to operate legally. That variance, however, was denied this summer by the Crown Point City Council.
The nuisance lawsuit case is still on-going but the future looks grim for CapGrow and Pinnacle Treatment Centers at this Crown Point location.
Costa Mesa, California Sober Living Home Nuisance Lawsuit
Nuisance lawsuits also came for sober living home operators, Pacific Shores Recovery in Costa Mesa, California. Pacific Shores Recovery is currently appealing the federal decision made in 2020 against their sober living home, which the City of Costa Mesa maintains violates municipal codes.
As the court battle between this sober living home operator and the city rages on, the Orange County Superior Court granted judgement for the city in an abatement action against Pacific Shores Recovery. This means that, for the time being, Pacific Shores Recovery must cease operation of their sober living home in the city.
Like the nuisance lawsuits being visited on the sober living home operators in Indiana, the lawsuits filed against Pacific Shores Recovery are also seeking attorney fees from the sober living home operators, making the entire experience even more expensive.
Like the sober living home operators in Indiana, Pacific Shores Recovery argues that Costa Mesa municipal code is discriminatory against people with SUD and in violation of the ADA.
Time will tell if their appeal is successful on these grounds.
Stuart, Florida Sober Living Home Nuisance Lawsuit
The nuisance lawsuit being visited on sober living home owners, Michael and Eileen Gorman in Stuart, Florida is somewhat different from the aforementioned lawsuits in Indiana and California. In this lawsuit, city officials opted to use building code, instead of zoning code, as a tool to cease certain sober living home operations in the city.
The city of Stuart, Florida, is suing Michael and Eileen Gorman in an effort to force their hand in closing their sober living home until they can prove that the building meets Florida Building Code for residences. The city claims that the couple is housing residents in rooms without windows and/or exit doors, which is a fire hazard. The city claims that they learned of these conditions after responding to a fire at the building and discovering that some rooms were not meeting adequate safety standards.
Clearly, if these claims are true, then these safety conditions should be addressed immediately for the safety of residents. However, given the history of NIMBYism and other opportunistic (and sometimes fabricated) attacks on sober living homes in our country, it would not be surprising if these accusations were based more in bias against the sober living home community than in reality.
Looking for an Easier Way to Run Your Sober Living Home? We’re Here to Help
Sober Living App makes it easier - and more profitable - to operate sober living homes.
Our all-in-one app handles rent collection, admissions, property management, residents’ care coordination, community contacts, transportation details, calendars, staff, alumni and more - all from the convenience of your phone.
Claim your free trial today and see why more sober living homes prefer the Sober Living App.