Share This Page

New Castle man sues homeless shelter, says turned away because of seeing eye dog

| Friday, June 28, 2013, 3:03 p.m.

A New Castle homeless shelter turned away a blind man because they couldn't accommodate his seeing eye dog, according to a federal discrimination lawsuit filed Friday.

Kenneth DeFiore, age not available, filed the lawsuit against the City Rescue Mission of New Castle, a faith-based shelter that provides temporary lodging for the homeless, and James Henderson, a program manager at the shelter. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder filed a similar lawsuit later in the day against the shelter and Henderson on DeFiore's behalf.

According to the complaint, DeFiore — diagnosed with blindness in 2006 — became homeless in November 2011 when his landlord evicted him from his apartment. A month later, he called City Rescue Mission to request a bed, but Henderson told him they would not accept him as long as “Gabby,” DeFiore's service-trained Labrador retriever, accompanied him.

Records from the shelter show there was at least one vacant bed available at the shelter every night between Dec. 1 and Dec. 22, the lawsuit says.

Henderson did not return a call seeking comment.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.