... TelefaxNo.DanaCarreraNo.94C4094JUdgecastilloPlaintiffsDefendant.vs.SelmaS.BUYCKS-ROBERSON,)ReneeBROOKS and CalvinROBERSON) on behalf of themselves and )otherssimilarlysituated,))))))))))))CITIBANKFEDERALSAVINGSBANK, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURTFOR THE NORTHERNDISTRICT OF ILLINOISEASTERNDIVISIONSECONDAMENDEDCOMPLAINTPlaintiffsSelmaS.Buycks-Roberson,ReneeBrooks and CalvinR.Roberson, on behalf of themselves and otherssimilarlysituated,by and throughtheirattorneys,makethisSecondAmendedComplaintagainstDefendant,citibankFederalSavingsBank("Citibank").NATURE OF THE ACTION1.ThisisacivilactionbroughtbySelmaS.Buycks-Roberson,ReneeBrooks and CalvinR.Roberson on behalf of themselves and allotherAfrican-Americanswhosehomeloanapplicationstocitibankoriginatedfrom the Chicagometropolitanarea and whoseapplicationswererejectedbecause of theirraceorcolororbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhood in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated.Thisactionseeksinjunctiverelief and monetarydamagesforviolations of 42u.S.C.§§1981 and 1982;42U.S.C.§3605 and 15U.S.C.§169l(a).JURISDICTION AND VENUE2.Jurisdiction of thiscourtarisesunder28U.S.C.§1343(a)(4),42U.S.C.§3613(a)(1)(A) and 15U.S.C.§1691e(f).3.Venueisproper in the NorthernDistrict of Illinoissince some of the acts and transactionscomplained of occurred in thisdistrict. THE PARTIES4.PlaintiffSelmaS.Buycks-RobersonisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Broadview,Illinois.5.PlaintiffReneeBrooksisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Chicago,Illinois.6.PlaintiffCalvinR.RobersonisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Chicago,Illinois.7.Defendantcitibankisafederalsavingsbankthatoffersresidentialmortgageloans("homeloans").CLASSACTIONSALLEGATIONS8.(a)Plaintiffsarecitibankhomeloanapplicants;theybringthisaction on behalf of themselves and allotherAfrican-Americanhomeloanapplicantssimilarlysituated.ThisactionisbroughtasaclassactionpursuanttoRule23(b)(2) and Rule23(b)(3) of the FederalRules of CivilProcedure.(b) The classconsists of allAfrican-Americanswhofiledapplicationsforhomeloanstocitibank and wererejected on orafterJuly6,1992becausetheyareAfrican-American and/ or2because the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocatedwaspredominantlyAfrican-American.(c) The classissonumerousthatjoinder of allpersonsisimpracticable.Plaintiffsareinformed and believethatmanyhomeloanapplicationstoDefendantbyAfrican-Americanswereillegallyrejected. On information and belief,Defendantrejected the homeloanapplications of manydozens of African-Americanapplicantsbecause of theirraceorcolor, and/ orbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated.(d)Plaintiffswillfairly and adequatelyprotect the interests of allclassmembers,astheyaremembers of the class and theirclaimsaretypical of the claims of allclassmembers.Plaintiffsareincensedby the treatmenttheyhavereceived and willaggressivelypursuetheiraswellas the class'sinterests.Plaintiffs'interests in obtaininginjunctiverelief and monetarydamagesfor the violations of the above-mentionedfederalstatutesareconsistentwith and notantagonistictothose of anypersonwithin the class.(e) The commonquestions of law and factinclude:(i)whetherDefendanthadapolicy,practiceorproceduretorejecthomeloanapplications on the basis of the applicants'raceor on the basis of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated;(ii)whether the conductallegedhereinis in violation of Title42U.S.C.§§1981 and 1982;42U.S.C.§3605 and 15U.S.C.3§1691(a); and (iii)whetherPlaintiffsareentitledtoanaward of actual,compensatoryorpunitivedamages.(f) The wrongfulconductallegedhereinhasbeentakengenerallyagainstallmembers of the class in thatAfrican-Americanhomeloanapplicantshavehadtheirloanapplicationsrejected on the basis of theirraceorcolor,orbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated,orboth,pursuantto the policies,practicesorprocedures of Defendant.(g) The commonquestions of fact and lawpredominateoverquestionsaffectingonlyindividualclassmembers.(h)Aclassactionissuperiortootheravailablemethodsfor the fair and efficientadjudication of the controversy in that:(i)amUltiplicity of suitswithconsequentburden on the courts and Defendantshouldbeavoided; and (ii)itwouldbeundulyburdensomeforallclassmemberstointerveneasparties-plaintiffs in thisaction. THE FACTSMs.Buycks-Roberson9. On oraboutApril4,1992,PlaintiffSelmaBuycks-Robersonappliedforahomeloan of approximately$43,700fromcitibank.10. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$43,500 on Ms.Buycks-Roberson'shome,locatedat2057South25thAvenue in Broadview,Illinois.11. The propertythatMs.Buycks-Robersonattemptedtorefinanceislocated in aneighborhood in which the African-4Americanrepresentationisgrowing and currentlyconstitutesoverfiftypercent(50%) of thatneighborhood'spopulation.12.Ms.Buycks-Robersonprovidedtocitibankextensivefinancialdocumentationconcerningherfinancialability and the property,includingdocumentsshowingannualincome of over$47,000.13. On oraboutApril28,1992,Ms.Buycks-RobersonreceivedfromDefendantcitibankaletterthatinformedherthathermortgageloanapplicationhadbeendeniedbecause of delinquentcreditobligations and otheradversecredit.14. On June19,1992,Ms.'Buycks-Robersonreappliedfor the homeloan, and againprovidedtocitibankextensivefinancial.documentationconcerningherannualincome,financialability and additionalinformationconcerninghercreditworthiness.15. On orafterJuly10,1992,Ms.Buycks-Robersonreceivedfromcitibankaletterthatinformedherthathermortgageloanapplicationhadbeendeniedbecauseher"income[did]notsupport the amount of creditrequested."16.Ms.Buycks-Robersonwasqualifiedtoreceive the loanshesoughtfromcitibank.Ms.Brooks17. On oraboutNovember25,1993,PlaintiffReneeBrooksappliedforahomeloan of approximately$95,000fromcitibank.18.Ms.BrooksprovidedCitibankwithalldocumentationthatCitibankrequired.519. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$95,000 on Ms.Brooks'scondominium,locatedat5000SouthCornellStreet in Chicago,Illinois.20. The propertythatMs.Brooksattemptedtorefinanceislocated in aneighborhood in whichthereisasignificantAfrican-Americanpopulation.21. On oraboutMarch8,1994,Ms.Brooks'sapplicationforahomeloanwasdenied on the groundsthatshehadinadequatecollateral, and on the groundsthatshehadsubmittedanincompleteapplication.22.Ms.Brookswasqualifiedtoreceive the homeloanshesoughtfrom'citibank.Mr.Roberson23. On oraboutJuly9,1993,PlaintiffCalvinRobersonappliedforahomeloan of approximately$43,000fromcitibank.24. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$43,000 on Mr.Roberson'shome,locatedat2847West85thStreet in Chicago,Illinois.25. The propertywhichMr.Robersonattemptedtorefinanceisloc~ted in aneighborhood in which the African-Americanrepresentationisgrowing.26.Mr.Robersonprovidedcitibankwithalldocumentationthatcitibankrequested,includingdocumentsshowinganannualincome of approximately$69,000fromhismanagementpositionatAT&T, and the equity in hishomevaluedatapproximately$75,000.Mr.Robersonalsoprovided"documentationshowingadditionalliquidassetswell in excess of the amount of the loanrequested.6Mr.Roberson'sincomewasmorethansufficienttoenablehimtomeethiscreditobligations.27.' On oraboutJuly9,1993,Mr.Robersonreceivedaletterfrom'citibank,denyinghisapplicationforrefinancing on the groundsthatitwas"incomplete," and on the groundsthatDefendantcitibankdidnot"makethistype of loan.".28.Mr.Robersonwasqualifiedtoreceive the loanhesoughtfromcitibank.COUNTIEQUALCREDIT ... TelefaxNo.DanaCarreraNo.94C4094JUdgecastilloPlaintiffsDefendant.vs.SelmaS.BUYCKS-ROBERSON,)ReneeBROOKS and CalvinROBERSON) on behalf of themselves and )otherssimilarlysituated,))))))))))))CITIBANKFEDERALSAVINGSBANK, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURTFOR THE NORTHERNDISTRICT OF ILLINOISEASTERNDIVISIONSECONDAMENDEDCOMPLAINTPlaintiffsSelmaS.Buycks-Roberson,ReneeBrooks and CalvinR.Roberson, on behalf of themselves and otherssimilarlysituated,by and throughtheirattorneys,makethisSecondAmendedComplaintagainstDefendant,citibankFederalSavingsBank("Citibank").NATURE OF THE ACTION1.ThisisacivilactionbroughtbySelmaS.Buycks-Roberson,ReneeBrooks and CalvinR.Roberson on behalf of themselves and allotherAfrican-Americanswhosehomeloanapplicationstocitibankoriginatedfrom the Chicagometropolitanarea and whoseapplicationswererejectedbecause of theirraceorcolororbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhood in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated.Thisactionseeksinjunctiverelief and monetarydamagesforviolations of 42u.S.C.§§1981 and 1982;42U.S.C.§3605 and 15U.S.C.§169l(a).JURISDICTION AND VENUE2.Jurisdiction of thiscourtarisesunder28U.S.C.§1343(a)(4),42U.S.C.§3613(a)(1)(A) and 15U.S.C.§1691e(f).3.Venueisproper in the NorthernDistrict of Illinoissince some of the acts and transactionscomplained of occurred in thisdistrict. THE PARTIES4.PlaintiffSelmaS.Buycks-RobersonisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Broadview,Illinois.5.PlaintiffReneeBrooksisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Chicago,Illinois.6.PlaintiffCalvinR.RobersonisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Chicago,Illinois.7.Defendantcitibankisafederalsavingsbankthatoffersresidentialmortgageloans("homeloans").CLASSACTIONSALLEGATIONS8.(a)Plaintiffsarecitibankhomeloanapplicants;theybringthisaction on behalf of themselves and allotherAfrican-Americanhomeloanapplicantssimilarlysituated.ThisactionisbroughtasaclassactionpursuanttoRule23(b)(2) and Rule23(b)(3) of the FederalRules of CivilProcedure.(b) The classconsists of allAfrican-Americanswhofiledapplicationsforhomeloanstocitibank and wererejected on orafterJuly6,1992becausetheyareAfrican-American and/ or2because the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocatedwaspredominantlyAfrican-American.(c) The classissonumerousthatjoinder of allpersonsisimpracticable.Plaintiffsareinformed and believethatmanyhomeloanapplicationstoDefendantbyAfrican-Americanswereillegallyrejected. On information and belief,Defendantrejected the homeloanapplications of manydozens of African-Americanapplicantsbecause of theirraceorcolor, and/ orbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated.(d)Plaintiffswillfairly and adequatelyprotect the interests of allclassmembers,astheyaremembers of the class and theirclaimsaretypical of the claims of allclassmembers.Plaintiffsareincensedby the treatmenttheyhavereceived and willaggressivelypursuetheiraswellas the class'sinterests.Plaintiffs'interests in obtaininginjunctiverelief and monetarydamagesfor the violations of the above-mentionedfederalstatutesareconsistentwith and notantagonistictothose of anypersonwithin the class.(e) The commonquestions of law and factinclude:(i)whetherDefendanthadapolicy,practiceorproceduretorejecthomeloanapplications on the basis of the applicants'raceor on the basis of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated;(ii)whether the conductallegedhereinis in violation of Title42U.S.C.§§1981 and 1982;42U.S.C.§3605 and 15U.S.C.3§1691(a); and (iii)whetherPlaintiffsareentitledtoanaward of actual,compensatoryorpunitivedamages.(f) The wrongfulconductallegedhereinhasbeentakengenerallyagainstallmembers of the class in thatAfrican-Americanhomeloanapplicantshavehadtheirloanapplicationsrejected on the basis of theirraceorcolor,orbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated,orboth,pursuantto the policies,practicesorprocedures of Defendant.(g) The commonquestions of fact and lawpredominateoverquestionsaffectingonlyindividualclassmembers.(h)Aclassactionissuperiortootheravailablemethodsfor the fair and efficientadjudication of the controversy in that:(i)amUltiplicity of suitswithconsequentburden on the courts and Defendantshouldbeavoided; and (ii)itwouldbeundulyburdensomeforallclassmemberstointerveneasparties-plaintiffs in thisaction. THE FACTSMs.Buycks-Roberson9. On oraboutApril4,1992,PlaintiffSelmaBuycks-Robersonappliedforahomeloan of approximately$43,700fromcitibank.10. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$43,500 on Ms.Buycks-Roberson'shome,locatedat2057South25thAvenue in Broadview,Illinois.11. The propertythatMs.Buycks-Robersonattemptedtorefinanceislocated in aneighborhood in which the African-4Americanrepresentationisgrowing and currentlyconstitutesoverfiftypercent(50%) of thatneighborhood'spopulation.12.Ms.Buycks-Robersonprovidedtocitibankextensivefinancialdocumentationconcerningherfinancialability and the property,includingdocumentsshowingannualincome of over$47,000.13. On oraboutApril28,1992,Ms.Buycks-RobersonreceivedfromDefendantcitibankaletterthatinformedherthathermortgageloanapplicationhadbeendeniedbecause of delinquentcreditobligations and otheradversecredit.14. On June19,1992,Ms.'Buycks-Robersonreappliedfor the homeloan, and againprovidedtocitibankextensivefinancial.documentationconcerningherannualincome,financialability and additionalinformationconcerninghercreditworthiness.15. On orafterJuly10,1992,Ms.Buycks-Robersonreceivedfromcitibankaletterthatinformedherthathermortgageloanapplicationhadbeendeniedbecauseher"income[did]notsupport the amount of creditrequested."16.Ms.Buycks-Robersonwasqualifiedtoreceive the loanshesoughtfromcitibank.Ms.Brooks17. On oraboutNovember25,1993,PlaintiffReneeBrooksappliedforahomeloan of approximately$95,000fromcitibank.18.Ms.BrooksprovidedCitibankwithalldocumentationthatCitibankrequired.519. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$95,000 on Ms.Brooks'scondominium,locatedat5000SouthCornellStreet in Chicago,Illinois.20. The propertythatMs.Brooksattemptedtorefinanceislocated in aneighborhood in whichthereisasignificantAfrican-Americanpopulation.21. On oraboutMarch8,1994,Ms.Brooks'sapplicationforahomeloanwasdenied on the groundsthatshehadinadequatecollateral, and on the groundsthatshehadsubmittedanincompleteapplication.22.Ms.Brookswasqualifiedtoreceive the homeloanshesoughtfrom'citibank.Mr.Roberson23. On oraboutJuly9,1993,PlaintiffCalvinRobersonappliedforahomeloan of approximately$43,000fromcitibank.24. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$43,000 on Mr.Roberson'shome,locatedat2847West85thStreet in Chicago,Illinois.25. The propertywhichMr.Robersonattemptedtorefinanceisloc~ted in aneighborhood in which the African-Americanrepresentationisgrowing.26.Mr.Robersonprovidedcitibankwithalldocumentationthatcitibankrequested,includingdocumentsshowinganannualincome of approximately$69,000fromhismanagementpositionatAT&T, and the equity in hishomevaluedatapproximately$75,000.Mr.Robersonalsoprovided"documentationshowingadditionalliquidassetswell in excess of the amount of the loanrequested.6Mr.Roberson'sincomewasmorethansufficienttoenablehimtomeethiscreditobligations.27.' On oraboutJuly9,1993,Mr.Robersonreceivedaletterfrom'citibank,denyinghisapplicationforrefinancing on the groundsthatitwas"incomplete," and on the groundsthatDefendantcitibankdidnot"makethistype of loan.".28.Mr.Robersonwasqualifiedtoreceive the loanhesoughtfromcitibank.COUNTIEQUALCREDIT ... TelefaxNo.DanaCarreraNo.94C4094JUdgecastilloPlaintiffsDefendant.vs.SelmaS.BUYCKS-ROBERSON,)ReneeBROOKS and CalvinROBERSON) on behalf of themselves and )otherssimilarlysituated,))))))))))))CITIBANKFEDERALSAVINGSBANK, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURTFOR THE NORTHERNDISTRICT OF ILLINOISEASTERNDIVISIONSECONDAMENDEDCOMPLAINTPlaintiffsSelmaS.Buycks-Roberson,ReneeBrooks and CalvinR.Roberson, on behalf of themselves and otherssimilarlysituated,by and throughtheirattorneys,makethisSecondAmendedComplaintagainstDefendant,citibankFederalSavingsBank("Citibank").NATURE OF THE ACTION1.ThisisacivilactionbroughtbySelmaS.Buycks-Roberson,ReneeBrooks and CalvinR.Roberson on behalf of themselves and allotherAfrican-Americanswhosehomeloanapplicationstocitibankoriginatedfrom the Chicagometropolitanarea and whoseapplicationswererejectedbecause of theirraceorcolororbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhood in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated.Thisactionseeksinjunctiverelief and monetarydamagesforviolations of 42u.S.C.§§1981 and 1982;42U.S.C.§3605 and 15U.S.C.§169l(a).JURISDICTION AND VENUE2.Jurisdiction of thiscourtarisesunder28U.S.C.§1343(a)(4),42U.S.C.§3613(a)(1)(A) and 15U.S.C.§1691e(f).3.Venueisproper in the NorthernDistrict of Illinoissince some of the acts and transactionscomplained of occurred in thisdistrict. THE PARTIES4.PlaintiffSelmaS.Buycks-RobersonisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Broadview,Illinois.5.PlaintiffReneeBrooksisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Chicago,Illinois.6.PlaintiffCalvinR.RobersonisanAfrican-Americancitizen of the united States whoresides in Chicago,Illinois.7.Defendantcitibankisafederalsavingsbankthatoffersresidentialmortgageloans("homeloans").CLASSACTIONSALLEGATIONS8.(a)Plaintiffsarecitibankhomeloanapplicants;theybringthisaction on behalf of themselves and allotherAfrican-Americanhomeloanapplicantssimilarlysituated.ThisactionisbroughtasaclassactionpursuanttoRule23(b)(2) and Rule23(b)(3) of the FederalRules of CivilProcedure.(b) The classconsists of allAfrican-Americanswhofiledapplicationsforhomeloanstocitibank and wererejected on orafterJuly6,1992becausetheyareAfrican-American and/ or2because the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocatedwaspredominantlyAfrican-American.(c) The classissonumerousthatjoinder of allpersonsisimpracticable.Plaintiffsareinformed and believethatmanyhomeloanapplicationstoDefendantbyAfrican-Americanswereillegallyrejected. On information and belief,Defendantrejected the homeloanapplications of manydozens of African-Americanapplicantsbecause of theirraceorcolor, and/ orbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated.(d)Plaintiffswillfairly and adequatelyprotect the interests of allclassmembers,astheyaremembers of the class and theirclaimsaretypical of the claims of allclassmembers.Plaintiffsareincensedby the treatmenttheyhavereceived and willaggressivelypursuetheiraswellas the class'sinterests.Plaintiffs'interests in obtaininginjunctiverelief and monetarydamagesfor the violations of the above-mentionedfederalstatutesareconsistentwith and notantagonistictothose of anypersonwithin the class.(e) The commonquestions of law and factinclude:(i)whetherDefendanthadapolicy,practiceorproceduretorejecthomeloanapplications on the basis of the applicants'raceor on the basis of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated;(ii)whether the conductallegedhereinis in violation of Title42U.S.C.§§1981 and 1982;42U.S.C.§3605 and 15U.S.C.3§1691(a); and (iii)whetherPlaintiffsareentitledtoanaward of actual,compensatoryorpunitivedamages.(f) The wrongfulconductallegedhereinhasbeentakengenerallyagainstallmembers of the class in thatAfrican-Americanhomeloanapplicantshavehadtheirloanapplicationsrejected on the basis of theirraceorcolor,orbecause of the racialcomposition of the neighborhoods in whichtheirpropertieswerelocated,orboth,pursuantto the policies,practicesorprocedures of Defendant.(g) The commonquestions of fact and lawpredominateoverquestionsaffectingonlyindividualclassmembers.(h)Aclassactionissuperiortootheravailablemethodsfor the fair and efficientadjudication of the controversy in that:(i)amUltiplicity of suitswithconsequentburden on the courts and Defendantshouldbeavoided; and (ii)itwouldbeundulyburdensomeforallclassmemberstointerveneasparties-plaintiffs in thisaction. THE FACTSMs.Buycks-Roberson9. On oraboutApril4,1992,PlaintiffSelmaBuycks-Robersonappliedforahomeloan of approximately$43,700fromcitibank.10. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$43,500 on Ms.Buycks-Roberson'shome,locatedat2057South25thAvenue in Broadview,Illinois.11. The propertythatMs.Buycks-Robersonattemptedtorefinanceislocated in aneighborhood in which the African-4Americanrepresentationisgrowing and currentlyconstitutesoverfiftypercent(50%) of thatneighborhood'spopulation.12.Ms.Buycks-Robersonprovidedtocitibankextensivefinancialdocumentationconcerningherfinancialability and the property,includingdocumentsshowingannualincome of over$47,000.13. On oraboutApril28,1992,Ms.Buycks-RobersonreceivedfromDefendantcitibankaletterthatinformedherthathermortgageloanapplicationhadbeendeniedbecause of delinquentcreditobligations and otheradversecredit.14. On June19,1992,Ms.'Buycks-Robersonreappliedfor the homeloan, and againprovidedtocitibankextensivefinancial.documentationconcerningherannualincome,financialability and additionalinformationconcerninghercreditworthiness.15. On orafterJuly10,1992,Ms.Buycks-Robersonreceivedfromcitibankaletterthatinformedherthathermortgageloanapplicationhadbeendeniedbecauseher"income[did]notsupport the amount of creditrequested."16.Ms.Buycks-Robersonwasqualifiedtoreceive the loanshesoughtfromcitibank.Ms.Brooks17. On oraboutNovember25,1993,PlaintiffReneeBrooksappliedforahomeloan of approximately$95,000fromcitibank.18.Ms.BrooksprovidedCitibankwithalldocumentationthatCitibankrequired.519. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$95,000 on Ms.Brooks'scondominium,locatedat5000SouthCornellStreet in Chicago,Illinois.20. The propertythatMs.Brooksattemptedtorefinanceislocated in aneighborhood in whichthereisasignificantAfrican-Americanpopulation.21. On oraboutMarch8,1994,Ms.Brooks'sapplicationforahomeloanwasdenied on the groundsthatshehadinadequatecollateral, and on the groundsthatshehadsubmittedanincompleteapplication.22.Ms.Brookswasqualifiedtoreceive the homeloanshesoughtfrom'citibank.Mr.Roberson23. On oraboutJuly9,1993,PlaintiffCalvinRobersonappliedforahomeloan of approximately$43,000fromcitibank.24. The purpose of the loanwastorefinanceanexistingmortgage of approximately$43,000 on Mr.Roberson'shome,locatedat2847West85thStreet in Chicago,Illinois.25. The propertywhichMr.Robersonattemptedtorefinanceisloc~ted in aneighborhood in which the African-Americanrepresentationisgrowing.26.Mr.Robersonprovidedcitibankwithalldocumentationthatcitibankrequested,includingdocumentsshowinganannualincome of approximately$69,000fromhismanagementpositionatAT&T, and the equity in hishomevaluedatapproximately$75,000.Mr.Robersonalsoprovided"documentationshowingadditionalliquidassetswell in excess of the amount of the loanrequested.6Mr.Roberson'sincomewasmorethansufficienttoenablehimtomeethiscreditobligations.27.' On oraboutJuly9,1993,Mr.Robersonreceivedaletterfrom'citibank,denyinghisapplicationforrefinancing on the groundsthatitwas"incomplete," and on the groundsthatDefendantcitibankdidnot"makethistype of loan.".28.Mr.Robersonwasqualifiedtoreceive the loanhesoughtfromcitibank.COUNTIEQUALCREDIT...