Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar KANAYO DERHEM v. BAY HOUSE MIAMI CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION CHARLES BRUMSTED, JR SEAN ZAHNISER MIKE DESIMONE JAMES PINKERT, et al

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-08-07 Docket: 1:20-cv-22318-KMW The eleventh-circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a housing discrimination case brought under the Fair Housing Act and state law. The court held that the plaintiff, Kanayo Derhem, failed to present sufficient evidence to support claims of disparate treatment or a hostile housing environment based on race and sex. Regarding the procedural history, the court applied an abuse of discretion standard to affirm the district court’s decision to strike new factual allegations from Derhem’s second amended complaint. The court reasoned that the district court acted within its inherent power to enforce orders and prevent undue prejudice, as the new allegations altered liability theories after discovery had closed and were known to the plaintiff at the time of the initial filing. On the merits of the Fair Housing Act claims, the court applied de novo review. For the disparate treatment claim, the court found that Derhem’s evidence did not constitute direct evidence of discrimination because the alleged discriminatory remarks by a board member were made by a non-decisionmaker and unrelated to the active decision-making process. Under the circumstantial evidence frameworks (McDonnell Douglas and “convincing mosaic”), the court determined that the defendants provided ample evidence that fines and amenity suspensions were imposed due to Derhem’s repeated, ongoing violations of condominium rules, rather than discriminatory animus. Additionally, the court held that a single racial epithet, even if true, was insufficient to establish a hostile housing environment claim as it did not rise to the level of being “severe or pervasive” enough to interfere with the plaintiff’s use and enjoyment of her home. The court also rejected Derhem’s arguments regarding Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58(a) compliance, claims raised for the first time on appeal, and allegations of judicial bias based solely on the number of adverse rulings. The practical consequence is that the judgment in favor of the Bay House Miami Condominium Association and its individual defendants stands, and Derhem’s appeal is dismissed without reversal or remand. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.