liable for compensatory damages. The individual agent defendants — King, Munoz, Scarpiniti, and Walker — all engaged in racial steering. The facts demonstrate that the four agents treated the black testers worse than the white testers. The magistrate judge’s conclusion that this different treatment was because of race is amply supported by the record. Matchmaker agents King, Munoz, Scarpiniti, and Walker consistently steered white testers toward white areas and black testers toward black areas. The four agents also denied the black testers information about housing that they readily gave to similarly situated white testers. We agree with the magistrate judge’s conclusion that the individual agents violated the testers rights under Sections 1982 and 3604. See Dwivedi, 895 F.2d at 1533 (<HOLDING>); Tolliver v. Amici, 800 F.2d 149 (7th
recognizing implied private action for violation of the real estate brokers and salesmen license act holding inter alia that real estate brokers who treat customers differently from one another because of their race violate the fair housing act holding brokers were not entitled to commission where agreement provided commission was payable at closing of real estate transaction because brokers did not produce clients that closed holding that the real estate brokers law which provided for the investigation of the acts of real estate brokers and the suspension or revocation of their licenses for specified acts is penal and must be strictly construed recognizing provisions of the fair housing act that forbid false statements that housing is unavailable to a person because of his race