Showing posts sorted by relevance for query "emotional support" dog. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query "emotional support" dog. Sort by date Show all posts

Friday, November 4, 2011

HUD Brings Housing Discrimination Charges Against Two Landlords In Separate Actions For Allegedly Hassling Tenants Over Support Animals

From press releases from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:

***

  • According to HUD’s charge, two tenants residing at the apartments in Reno, NV, were visited by a friend accompanied by his medically authorized emotional support dog. After seeing a dog in the building, the landlord of the property told one of the tenants that the building's “no-pets” policy barred their visitors from bringing animals into the unit.

    The tenant explained that her visitor’s dog is an emotional support animal and said she could provide documentation that the animal was necessary because of a disability. Nonetheless, one day after the tenants’ friend and his support animal visited again, DeAngeli served the tenants with an eviction notice, and later posted a note near their unit stating, “If harassed or bothered by tenants of these apartments call 911 immediately.”

Friday, August 9, 2013

Another Battle Brews Over Assistance/Emotional Support Animal; Dog Owner: 'She's The Child I Never Had. I Don’t Know What I'd Do Without Her!' HOA: Unit Owner Is Trying To Strong-Arm That Pooch Down Our Throats Without First Following Co-Op Procedures!

In New York City, the New York Post reports:

  • A cuddly cockapoo trained to fetch meds for her master — a Manhattan woman who suffers from post-9/11 posttraumatic stress disorder — may get them both evicted because of her building’s stringent no-pet policy.

    The 14-pound, black-and-white pooch, Ruby, was prescribed to Amy Eisenberg, 56, by her doctor to alleviate her illness.

    “I watched a man plummet to his death, and I can tell you from his suit to his striped tie to his white shirt, and I watched him spiral down,” Eisenberg, her eyes welling with tears, told The Post yesterday.

    “Ruby’s my fur baby,” Eisenberg said. “She’s the reason I get up in the morning. “She is the child I never had. I don’t know what I would do without her.”

    When Eisenberg suffers a heart palpitation from the stress, Ruby springs into action, lying across her lap and even delivering pills if the attack is severe.

    Still, the co-op’s management company filed an eviction proceeding against Eisenberg in 2012, claiming she was “harboring a dog” without written permission.

    Eisenberg’s doctor, Raymond Keller, said in a letter filed in Housing Court that “the presence of the dog is necessary for the emotional health of this patient.’’

    But a lawyer for the Lower East Side housing complex recently argued that Eisenberg hasn’t proved that she is disabled, despite the doctor’s letter and documents from the Health Department saying Ruby is her service dog.

    “I don’t understand how it could not be an ailment, especially after 9/11,” Eisenberg told The Post.

    Co-op attorney Bradley Silverbush doesn’t believe Eisenberg is really ill, and said she didn’t call Ruby a service dog until after getting the eviction notice.

    “Mrs. Eisenberg is trying to strong-arm the co-op by forcing them to accept her dog when she didn’t follow procedures,” he said.

    Eisenberg was working near the Twin Towers as an executive assistant at a financial firm on 9/11.

    She has filed a discrimination complaint with the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, saying that she should be able to keep the dog in her apartment under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    Eisenberg has lived at East River Housing on Grand Street since 1966. She’s due back in Housing Court to start a trial Aug. 14.

(1) The inability or refusal to make the distinction between a household pet and either a service animal or an emotional support/assistance animal can give rise to a very costly legal problem for landlords, homeowner associations, municipalities purporting to enforce code restrictions, etc. Both the Housing Feds, the Civil Rights Feds, and others have shown a high degree of interest when these situations arise. See, for example:
See, generally, A Comparative Study: Service Animals and Emotional Support Animals under the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act & An Overview of Assistance Animal Laws of Select States.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Another HOA Gets 'Bitten' By 'Companion Pooch'; Association To Cough Up $40K To Settle Suit With Civil Rights Feds Over Condo Resident's Right To Keep 'Depression' Dog


From the Office of the U.S. Attorney (Phialdelphia, Pennsylvania):

  • The United States [] announced a $40,000 consent decree that resolves a dispute alleging that the condominium association for The Philadelphian violated the Fair Housing Act by refusing to grant a resident’s request for a reasonable accommodation, announced United States Attorney Zane David Memeger. The Philadelphian consists of 776 units and is located on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway.

    The consent decree was filed today, with a complaint, in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The complaint alleges that The Philadelphian refused to grant a reasonable accommodation so that a resident with a disability could keep a small dog, named “Lucy,” in the condominium she owned in order to help her cope with the effects of depression.(1) The lawsuit further alleges that the defendant’s policy, with respect to reasonable accommodation, violated the Fair Housing Act with respect to this individual specifically, and constituted an illegal pattern or practice.

    Under the consent decree, the defendants will pay $15,000 to the resident with a disability, $10,000 as a civil penalty to the United States, and $15,000 into a fund to pay any other residents of The Philadelphian who may have claims based on The Philadelphian’s policy. Additionally, the defendants will attend fair housing education and training; implement a new reasonable accommodation policy for owners of assistance animals; and comply with notice, monitoring and reporting requirements. The consent decree requests that the Court maintain jurisdiction over this case for three years.

    “Enforcing the fair housing rights of persons with disabilities in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, including those with mental health disabilities, is a priority of this office,” said Memeger. “We will continue to work to ensure that those individuals with disabilities are not denied accommodations they need to live independently.”

    “Assistance animals are not pets. They play a vital role in helping people with disabilities live their lives fully,” said John TrasviƱa, HUD Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. “HUD and the Department of Justice will continue to ensure that condominium associations grant reasonable accommodations when they are needed.”

    The lawsuit arose as a result of a complaint that the resident filed with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). After an investigation of the complaint, HUD issued a charge of discrimination. Based on this complaint, other complaints filed by other residents of The Philadelphian, and the written policies issued by The Philadelphian, the Assistant Secretary of HUD determined that this defendant had engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination. The resident and the board of The Philadelphian elected to have the case heard in federal court.
For the U.S. Attorney press release, see United States Settles Disability Discrimination Case Involving A Resident With A Disability At The Philadelphian.

For the settlement agreement, see U.S. v. Philadelphian Owners Association.

(1) "Lucy" is apparently an example of what the literature generally refers to as an emotional support animal, an assistance animal that does not receive any specialized training to assist those with mental disabilities, but whose function is to simply provide motivation and emotional support to their owners (and that apparently qualifies as a 'reasonable accommodation' in connection with the enforcement of the federal Fair Housing Act; however such an assistance animal may not qualify as a 'service animal' in connection with the enforcement of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act). Emotional support animals are to be contrasted with what the literature refers to as 'service animals', animals that do receive specifice training to do work or perform tasks for those with disabilities. See generally:
It should be noted that, in enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act, it appears that 'service animals' may be limited to dogs, and that said dogs must have received the necessary training to do work or perform tasks for their owners (see Revised ADA Requirements - Service Animals). It doesn't appear that, in enforcing the Fair Housing Act, there are similar requirements for an animal to qualify as an emotional support/assistance animal constituting a 'reasonable accommodation' for its owner in connection with the enforcement of that owner's housing rights (although I suspect that the animal's owner will at least need a doctor's note prescribing the animal for the owner/patient's emotional stability, or possibly some other objective proof). See Reasonable Accomodations Under The Fair Housing Act - Q & A # 6, 11, 17.

Friday, December 7, 2012

Twinkie The Pig May Dodge Xmas Boot; City: With Proper Docs, Family May Be Entitled To 'Fair Housing' "Reasonable Accommodation" Granting 'Residency Status' To Miniature Porker As Emotional Support Animal For Down Syndrome Son


In Coral Springs, Florida, the South Florida Sun Sentinel reports:

  • Twinkie the pig might get to stay after all.

    Although it's against city codes to keep pigs as pets, the Ray family insists they should receive an exception because their pet pig Twinkie provides emotional support for their son, Kason, who has Down syndrome.

    On Tuesday, city officials asked for documentation, such as a doctor's prescription specifically for a pig as an emotional support animal, and documentation of Kason's dad's severe allergies, which prevent the family from having a dog or cat.

    "If you provide the additional information, we will be able to reevaluate the applicability of the ordinance," wrote City Attorney John J. Hearn. "If we receive the documentation ... we will look at making reasonable accommodations,"(1) he added Thursday.

    The Rays could have faced a daily fine of $500 for keeping the pig.

    After the story about Twinkie was published in the Sun Sentinel, the family's plight has been featured in the New York Daily News, the Huffington Post and a futures and commodity market news site. Local television stations aired her story and it also appeared on a Boston TV website. It even showed up in the Daily Mail in England.

    Kason's mother, Heather Ray, also received more than 260 signatures on her online petition at http://www.change.org asking the city to change its code and allow indoor pigs as pets.

    Heather Ray said Thursday she would happily provide the paperwork to put this matter to rest.

    "Mr. Hearn assured me that the city would not be fining us and that they would not be out to take Twinkie and that with the requested documentation we could come to an agreement in which Twinkie would be allowed as an emotional support animal for Kason without any further issues," she said. "I am satisfied with the agreement that we have come to and I appreciate the city being compassionate and understanding of our situation."(2)
Source: Twinkie the pet pig may get exception from Coral Springs.

For an earlier post on this story, see Miniature Swine A Therapy Animal, Says Homeowner After City Nixes Waiver Request To Keep Cuddly 3-Pound Pig; Situation May Be Federal Case In The Making If City Not Careful.

(1) In fact, this family may have legal rights under the Federal Fair Housing Act for reasonable accommodation to be granted when a household member has some type of physical or mental impairment. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities and requires residential property owners to make reasonable accommodation to allow people with disabilities and their families to use and enjoy their homes. See, for example:
(2) See 'The Swine Stays!' Says Judge To HOA; Well-Behaved Wilbur The Pot-Bellied Porker Dodges Boot As Effort To Evict Beloved Family Pet Deemed 'Not Kosher' for another post involving a successful attempt by a homeowner to score 'residency status' as a household animal for their beloved pig.

Friday, December 21, 2012

Another Assistance Pooch Sinks Fangs Into Landlord's Wallet; Property Owners To Cough Up $15K To Tenant, Bay State To Settle Fair Housing Charges Surrounding Renter's Care-Canine


From the Office of the Massachusetts Attorney General:

  • A property owner from Newton has agreed to pay $15,000 and make extensive policy changes at his businesses, settling allegations that a manager at one of his apartment complexes discriminated against a disabled tenant with an assistance dog, Attorney General Martha Coakley announced [].

    According to the assurance of discontinuance, filed Thursday in Suffolk Superior Court, Kevin Regan, the property manager at the Lord Baron Apartments in Burlington, allegedly refused to rent to a prospective tenant because she requested permission to reside with an assistance dog. Regan later agreed to rent to the tenant after being contacted by the AG’s Office and informed that his refusal to rent violated fair housing laws. Subsequent to the AG Coakley’s involvement, Regan allegedly threatened the victim with eviction if he received any complaints about her assistance dog.
***
  • The other defendants named in the assurance are the L.B. Nominee Trust, doing business as the Lord Baron Apartments, and its trustees, Kosow Construction Corporation and owner Marvin P. Kosow, both located in Newton. Regan is a resident of Westwood.

    The assurance requires the defendants to pay a total of $15,000 in restitution and penalties to the tenant and the Commonwealth.(1)
For the Massachusetts AG press release, see Property Owner Settles Claims of Housing Discrimination Against Tenant with Assistance Dog (Owner to Pay $15,000 and Implement New Policies to Avoid Violation of Fair Housing Laws).

(1) The inability or refusal to make the distinction between a household pet and either a service animal or an emotional support/assistance animal can give rise to a very costly legal problem for landlords, homeowner associations, municipalities purporting to enforce code restrictions, etc. Both the Housing Feds, the Civil Rights Feds, and others have shown a high degree of interest when these situations arise. See, for example:
See, generally, A Comparative Study: Service Animals and Emotional Support Animals under the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act & An Overview of Assistance Animal Laws of Select States.

Saturday, June 14, 2014

'Disability Dog' Takes $300K Bite Out Of Rogue Condo Association For Jerking Around His Wheelchair-Bound, Reasonable Accomodation-Seeking Owner In Violation Of Fair Housing Act

In Davie, Florida, The Miami Herald reports:

  • Calling the behavior of a Davie condominium association “absurd” and “unreasonable,” a federal judge has ordered a Davie condominium to allow a disabled resident to keep her service dog.

    The two-year dispute will carry a hefty price tag for the Sabal Palm Condominiums: $300,000.

    Deborah Fischer, a retired Broward art teacher who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 2000, was sued by Sabal Palm Condominiums after her dog, Sorenson, moved into her apartment in November 2011. Fischer, who uses a wheelchair and has limited use of her arms and hands, needs Sorenson to pick things, up, open and close doors and retrieve items from counter tops.

    “Sabal Palm got it exactly — and unreasonably — wrong,” U.S. District Judge Scola wrote in his order. “This is not just common sense — though it is most certainly that.”

    The condominium complex in Davie’s Pine Island Ridge neighborhood does not allow pets over 20 pounds and demanded medical records and other information to prove that Fischer needed Sorenson — a 5-year-old Labrador-golden retriever mix — to help her. Saying Fischer didn’t provide the proper documentation, the condo association sued, said the woman’s attorney, Matthew Dietz of Miami.

    Fischer, along with her husband, Larry, counter-sued, saying the condo board’s demands violated the federal Fair Housing Act, or FHA.

    Scola agreed with Fischer, and gave the condo board a serious verbal lashing in his 30-page order.(1)

    That the condo association “turned to the courts to resolve what should have been an easy decision is a sad commentary on the litigious nature of our society,” Scola wrote in a March 19 order. “And it does a disservice to people like Deborah who actually are disabled and have a legitimate need for a service dog as an accommodation under the FHA.”

    In their arguments, board members suggested that, even if Fischer needed a service dog, she could have gotten by with an animal that did not weigh more than the Sabal Palm’s 20-pount limit. But, Scola wrote, such a dog would not have been able to meet Fishcer’s needs. Sorenson, the judge ruled, was a “reasonable accommodation” to Sabal Palm’s requirements.

    “That a blind person may already have a cane, or that he or she could use a cane instead of a dog in no way prevents the blind person from also obtaining a seeing-eye dog as a reasonable accommodation under the FHA,” Scola wrote. “A contrary result is absurd.”

    After Scola ruled in the Fischers’ favor, Dietz said he negotiated the $300,000 settlement with the attorney representing Sabal Palm, Karen Nissen.

    Nissen did not return calls or an e-mail Tuesday. David Rosinsky, the attorney representing Marvin Silvergold, who was the board president at the time and was sued individually, said the case was “amicably resolved.” A summary judgment against Christopher Trapani, who was the attorney of the association at the time, was denied. Trapani could not be reached for comment.

    Fischer said the dispute started in November 2011, when she brought Sorenson home after getting him from Canine Companions for Independence, a nonprofit group that provides service dogs for people with disabilities. She had sent the complex’s association a letter notifying them that she would be getting a service dog. For five months, Fischer went back and forth with the association.

    “I have an obvious disability,” she said. “I just couldn’t believe how hard they were making it.”

    Fischer said Sorenson quickly became an important part of her life. He helped her do things she couldn’t do for herself — such as turning the lights in her apartment on and off, picking up TV remotes from coffee tables or counters, or scooping up keys from the floor. The retriever allowed her to perform routine tasks without bothering her husband.

    In all, Sorenson can recognize 40 separate commands, Fischer said.

    “He has made my life so much better,” she said.

    But as the litigation dragged on in court, Fischer said, the drama began to overwhelm her. She had lived in the complex for more than a dozen years, and, suddenly, people she had lived near for years were adverse parties to a lawsuit.

    “It was very difficult to deal with,” she said.

    Fischer’s lawyer said the facts were clear: “This is one of the worst cases like this that I’ve seen,” said Dietz, who specializes in civil rights and disability lawsuits. “It is obvious that the service dog would help her.”

    Dietz said a new board has since been elected and the rules have changed. He hopes the case will help others become more sensitve to the needs of disabled people.

    Fischer agreed, saying she hopes no one has to go through what she went through.

    “I am finally free of the questions, investigations and litigation,” she said. “We are at the point where we can have some peace of mind and finally move forward.”
Source: Davie woman with banished service dog gets $300,000 condo settlement (A Davie condo resident with MS will receive $300,000 from her Davie complex after she was told she couldn’t keep her service dog in her unit).

For the court ruling, see Sabal Palm Condominiums of Pine Island Ridge Association, Inc., v. Fischer, Case No. 12-60691-Civ-SCOLA (S.D. Fla. March 19, 2014).

(1) Judge Scola prefaced his ruling by acknowledging that, while the case before him was not such a case, "[t]here is some reason to be skeptical of requests to keep a dog as an accommodation for a disability in certain cases, particularly cases where the dog assists the disabled person by rendering emotional support."

See Fake Service Dogs, Real Problem or Not?  and Disability Dog Scams for more on the possible use of fake service dogs and fake identification by individuals to obtain special access to housing, public places or airports/airlines for their animal.

See, generally:
Go here and go here for earlier posts on service animals and the Fair Housing Act.

Friday, July 19, 2013

'Prescription Pooch' Feds Tag Landlord In Fair Housing Suit Alleging Refusal To Waive 'Pet Deposit' Requirement For Low-Income Tenant With Mental Disability Who Needed Emotional Support Animal, Followed By Subsequent Retaliation, Harassment That Forced Tenant To Move After She Filed HUD Complaint

From the U.S. Department of Justice (Washington, D.C.):

  • The Justice Department [] filed a lawsuit against the owners and managers of rental homes in and near Kelso and Longview, Wash., for violating the Fair Housing Act by discriminating against persons with disabilities.

    The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleges that Linda Barber, Bert Barber and Lori Thompson engaged in a pattern or practice of violating the Fair Housing Act or denied rights protected by the Act.

    Specifically, the lawsuit asserts that the defendants established and implemented a discriminatory policy that allowed waiver of the defendants’ mandatory $1,000 “pet deposit” for service animals with specialized training, but not for other assistance animals, including emotional support animals. The suit also alleges that, by refusing a tenant’s requests for a reasonable accommodation to waive the $1,000 pet deposit for her assistance animal, the defendants violated the Fair Housing Act.

    “The Fair Housing Act ensures that individuals with disabilities who live with and benefit from assistance animals have equal access to housing,” said Eric Halperin, Senior Counsel and Special Counsel for Fair Lending in the Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department will continue its vigorous enforcement of fair housing laws that protect the rights of persons with disabilities.”

    “The rights of our disabled citizens need to be protected and landlords should not engage in conduct that makes their lives more difficult,” said U.S. Attorney Jenny A. Durkan for the Western District of Washington. “A tenant should not have to repeatedly prove they need a service animal or other accommodation, and should not face retaliation when they make a complaint to those tasked with protecting their civil rights.”

    This lawsuit arose as a result of a complaint filed with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). A low-income tenant with a mental disability repeatedly asked the defendants to waive the $1,000 pet deposit for her assistance animal and provided numerous notes from medical professionals to support her request.

    As a result of the defendants’ policy and their failure to grant her request, she waited for over two and a half years to obtain an assistance animal and then began to pay the deposit in monthly installments at great financial hardship.

    After filing her HUD complaint, she was subjected to retaliation and harassment by the defendants, and she eventually moved out of the defendants’ unit. After HUD investigated the complaint, it issued a charge of discrimination and the matter was referred to the Justice Department.

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Miniature Swine A Therapy Animal, Says Homeowner After City Nixes Waiver Request To Keep Cuddly 3-Pound Pig; Situation May Be Federal Case In The Making If City Not Careful


In Coral Springs, Florida, the WTVJ-TV Channel 6 reports:

  • Kason Ray smiled big Friday as he played with Twinkie, his pet pig. The 8-year-old boy’s family in Coral Springs considers Twinkie a domesticated lifesaver. “She's very calming to him,” said Heather Ray, whose son has Down syndrome. “He'll scoop her up and love on her and pet on her. He really interacts with her so well.”

    But keeping the pig is against a city ban on livestock. Heather Ray said she was denied a waiver to keep Twinkie, but said she hasn’t been kicked out. "It's important for us to have something for Kason that he feels accepted," Ray said. "This animal loves him no matter what."

    Twinkie helps Kason get through his days. It's something psychotherapist Alina Gastesi-de Armas recommends. "The unconditional love a pet gives them allows them to grow and to have empathy," Gastesi-de Armas said. "People are sometimes not as open to their needs as a pet might be."

    In keeping the pig, the Ray family invokes the American Disability Act, a law that gives civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities that are like those provided to individuals on the basis of race, sex, national origin and religion.

    Even though the city told the Ray family they could not keep their pig, the ordinance hasn’t been enforced, the family said. It is something the family said it is happy about.

    "If we do get fined or get notices to get rid of her, then we will go to the Department of Justice and take it one step further," Ray said.(1)

    Why not get a cat or dog? Kason's father is allergic to them, and Twinkie doesn't make anyone cough or sneeze, the family said.

    In Volusia County, a 2-year-old autistic boy and his family are facing a similar problem – using animals to help cope with everyday life, while breaking a city code.

    "It doesn't take into consideration the uniqueness of each person's situation," Gastesi-de Armas said. "This child obviously has a great deal of fondness for this pet and hopefully people will take that into consideration when they make their decision."
Source: Pig Is Part of Coral Springs Family Despite City Livestock Ban (A Coral Springs family plans to keep their pet pig, even though there is a city livestock ban).

See also, South Florida Sun Sentinel: Twinkie the pig may have to move out of Coral Springs:
  • Convinced the pig was in the best interest of her child, Ray decided she'd deal with City Hall later. She bought the pig from a farm in Texas for $1,300. The pig costs the family about $25 a month for food and vet bills.

    Twinkie is one of nearly 300 miniature pigs sold every year, said Lona Morris, owner of Texas Tiny Pigs in Waco, Texas. She said families with allergies are among her top customers, as well as people looking for therapy animals.

    The city shouldn't consider Twinkie livestock because she wasn't bred for food or clothing fiber, argues Susan Magidson, president of the Society for the Advancement of Pet Pigs in Pennsylvania.

    "That's very sad," she said of the Rays' situation. "Pigs are the finest companion animal ... They cause no illnesses to people, with rare exceptions, they don't bark at night. They are very, very quiet."

    Jerry Brown, spokesman for the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development in Washington, D.C., said if a medical professional prescribes the pig as a therapy animal, then the Ray family might be protected under the Fair Housing Act.(2) Ray said she has a note from her pediatrician.

    Ray argues that pigs are increasingly being used as animal-assisted therapy. Shriners Hospitals for Children in Northern California, for example, has used pigs as therapy.
(1) The inability to make the distinction between a service animal, an emotional support/assistance animal and a household pet can give rise to a very costly legal problem for landlords, homeowner associations, municipalities purporting to enforce code restrictions, etc. Both the Housing Feds, the Civil Rights Feds, and others have shown a high degree of interest when these situations arise. See, for example:
In other cases in which the four-legged animals have prevailed over their two-legged antagonist-counterparts in actions attempting to mischaracterize them as livestock, see:
  • Gebauer v. Lake Forest Property Owners Ass'n, 723 So. 2d 1288 (Ala. Civ. App 1988) (in ruling against a homeowners' association and in favor of a family and its Vietnamese pot-bellied pig, the civil appeals court of Alabama pointedly observed "This is not a case in which a family is treating a farm animal like a pet, such as Arnold the pig of television's "Green Acres" fame. Gebauer bought a breed of pig that is bred specifically as a pet. The breed is much smaller than a farm pig and differs from a farm pig in several respects...");
    ...............................
  • James v. Smith, 537 So. 2d 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (under the specific facts of the case, a Florida appellate court concluded that two ponies kept by a landowner were "domestic pets" within an exception to an anti-livestock covenant in a housing subdivision's deed restrictions, and accordingly, were permitted to stay on the premises. 537 So.2d at 1076-77);
    ............................
  • 'The Swine Stays!' Says Judge To HOA; Well-Behaved Wilbur The Pot-Bellied Porker Dodges Boot As Effort To Evict Beloved Family Pet Deemed 'Not Kosher' (homeowners association was successfully sued for threatening foreclosure on a family if they didn't give their family pet, a pot-bellied pig, the boot. Go here for the persuasive arguments, including case law authorities, made by the homeowner in this case; and go here for a deposition transcript from the family veterinarian, who was able to persuasively articulate to the court the difference between a breed of pig that is considered to be a 'household pet' and a regular farm pig that is generally considered 'livestock' - a consumption pig).
(2) Ibid.

Monday, December 31, 2012

Phony 'Prescription Pooch' Claims Used To Dodge 'No Pet' Prohibitions In Residential Buildings Becoming More Flagrant? Some Say Yes


In New York City, Habitat Magazine reports:

  • You no longer have the right to live in a no-dog building. People with allergies, people afraid of dogs, people who don’t like dog waste and urine on the sidewalk or loud barking, or even people who’d simply rather live without dogs — sorry, but your rights and preferences are meaningless.

    That, at least, is the message co-op and condo boards, attorneys, and others are taking from the plethora of people falsely claiming a disability to avoid pet prohibitions. Not physical disability or psychiatric disability, for which there are specially trained service dogs, but emotional disability — which no one can see, anyone can claim, and for which your friendly family doctor will write a note, no questions asked.

    “It’s ridiculous,” says attorney Adam Leitman Bailey, principal in his eponymous firm. “People get a notice to remove a dog, all of a sudden they get a doctor’s note. If you need a dog for support reasons, why would you go to a psychiatrist only after you get an eviction notice?”

    False claims of emotional disability are probably “happening more and more often,” agrees Jennifer L. Stewart, an attorney with Smith, Buss & Jacobs who has defended disabled clients. Indeed, she adds, “I’ve seen signs posted in pet stores: ‘Do you want a dog? Do you live in no-pet buildings? Here’s what you do.’ I was a little shocked at how flagrant that was.”

Monday, June 18, 2012

Judge OKs Asset Attachment Against Alleged F'closed Home Hijacker For Renting Out House To Unwitting Family, Charging Pet Deposit For Service Animal

In Auburn, Maine, the Sun Journal reports:

  • A Turner family is suing a Leeds man claiming he rented them a house that he didn’t own. John Stetson and Melissa Rollins say they were seeking a rental in December for themselves and their children: two sons, ages 2 and 17, and a 19-year-old daughter. They answered an ad for a house for rent that was posted on the Craigslist website. They recently filed a complaint in Androscoggin County Superior Court against John Gray.

  • When the family called the phone number listed in the online ad, Gray answered. He showed the family a four-bedroom house at 64 Bean St. in Turner with a two-car garage during the two weeks following Christmas.

  • The family signed a one-year lease with Gray on Jan. 6, the complaint said. They paid Gray a security deposit of $500 and a $50 propane fee plus a pet deposit of $250, because their daughter, Brittany, needs a black Labrador service dog for her post-traumatic stress disorder.
***
  • At the time the family leased the house from Gray, it belonged to the MSHA. Before a scheduled June 6 eviction hearing, the family agreed to MSHA’s eviction judgment.
***
  • In a separate court proceeding shortly after the lawsuit was filed, the family was successful in securing an attachment of Gray’s property and other assets in the amount of $4,300 in the “reasonable likelihood” they would recover judgment against Gray and the Rebis Agency.

  • The family, represented by attorneys Maureen Boston and Matthew Dyer at Pine Tree Legal Assistance,(1) claim Gray falsely represented himself when he signed a lease with the family.

  • The family claims it suffered monetary and emotional damages due to what they said was Gray’s fraudulent misrepresentations. The family is seeking an award of punitive damages as well as attorney’s fees.

  • In addition, the family claims that state law bars landlords from charging tenants damage deposits for service animals.(2)

(1) Pine Tree Legal Assistance provides free legal help to Maine people with low incomes, and has offices in every part of the state, from Presque Isle to Portland.

(2) The inability to make the distinction between a service animal and a pet can become a very costly problem for landlords, homeowner associations, etc. See, for example: