{"id":26373,"date":"2026-10-20T14:21:49","date_gmt":"2026-10-20T14:21:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.anthonydidonato.net\/wordpress\/?p=26373"},"modified":"2026-10-20T14:21:50","modified_gmt":"2026-10-20T14:21:50","slug":"when-a-landlord-says-i-didnt-know-a-fair-housing-lesson-about-assistance-animals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.anthonydidonato.net\/wordpress\/when-a-landlord-says-i-didnt-know-a-fair-housing-lesson-about-assistance-animals\/","title":{"rendered":"When a Landlord Says \u201cI Didn\u2019t Know\u201d: A Fair Housing Lesson About Assistance Animals"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Can a landlord get into trouble for something they claim they didn\u2019t know?<\/strong> In fair housing, the answer may be yes. A court case involving a rental applicant and her emotional support animal shows why landlords need to pay attention to what prospective tenants communicate\u2014not just the exact words they use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case involved Ashley McClendon and Sarah Gailey, who applied to rent a property from Peter Bresler in 2020. The rental advertisement stated that dogs were not allowed, but Gailey contacted the landlord to request permission for McClendon\u2019s support animal, a 50-pound terrier mix named Tinkerbell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The landlord objected to the dog\u2019s size and ultimately denied the rental application. Although the applicants did not spell out McClendon\u2019s specific disabilities, their emails described the animal as a verified support animal and referred to reasonable accommodations and disability-related protections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The landlord argued that he had not been given enough information to know the applicant had a disability. Initially, a federal district court agreed. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision in December 2022, explaining that a person requesting an accommodation for a service or assistance animal does not necessarily have to explicitly disclose a disability to receive fair housing protections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case returned to the lower court, which awarded McClendon $14,800 in damages in March 2023. The court found that the landlord reasonably should have known about her disability based on the communications he received.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What does this mean for landlords and real estate professionals in 2026?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The lesson is simple: Pay attention to what applicants are telling you. A request involving an assistance animal may trigger responsibilities under fair housing laws, even when the person has not disclosed a specific diagnosis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here are three important reminders:<\/p>\n\n\n\n