Absurd Animal Cases in Homeowners Associations
Provided by HG.org
In my former legal practice, I found that few cases were more prone to absurd happenings, bizarre government policies, or overly expensive litigation than pet cases.
Well meaning associations or developers set up rules to either prohibit pets all together or to limit their size, often in an effort to avoid having excessively large, loud, or potentially dangerous animals in the community. But, of course, as with any restriction, some owners will always feel that rules are meant to be broken (or at the very least, that an exception should be made just for them) and overweight pets find their way with surprising frequency into deed restricted communities.
Sadly, most people see their pets as members of the family, even when buying them will put the owner in direct violation of their association's covenants. So, asking someone to get rid of their pet, even though they should have known before buying or renting in the community that there was a weight restriction, is often the equivalent of asking that person to give away their child. In truth, some people prefer their pets to their kids! So, a fight is often inevitable, often with surprising outcomes.
Let the animal puns begin...
The Replacement Dog
In one case I handled, an owner had a Border Collie (a breed that averages between 30-45 pounds) in a community with a 25-pound weight limit for pets. The association asked us to begin legal proceedings against this owner to enforce the weight restriction. The litigation began to drag on for some time, with each side trying to be top dog (I warned you). In the midst of the legal wrangling, the dog in question...ahem...expired. In one of the more unusual tasks I ever performed during my legal career, I was asked by the client to call the veterinary clinic to confirm that the dog had, in fact, chased his last mailman and had passed into the great dog park in the sky. He had, and I thought I saw a sad, but mutually agreeable outcome to the lawsuit within our grasp.
I was wrong. In less than a month, the owner had bought a brand new Border Collie.
Now we were really stuck. The case would have to go all the way through to a final judgment and everyone knew it. This owner’s wife, distraught over her husband’s dogged (sorry) determination to thwart the association’s efforts to enforce its rules, left him. He fell behind on his bills, ate through his savings while paying his attorney’s fees, and was in jeopardy of going into mortgage foreclosure. The owner became depressed and this case was about to get a lot hairier (furrier?).
The Case Goes to the Dogs
While pets are not people, and thus, cannot trigger the anti-discriminatory policies of the Fair Housing Act or the various state and federal agencies set up to ensure equal housing rights, their owners are. If the owner has a disability they may be entitled to a “reasonable accommodation” to allow that person to live in the community. In case you are not already familiar with the concept, a large body of law requires associations to make “reasonable accommodations” for those with disabilities. What constitutes a “reasonable accommodation” is exceptionally broad and, under the right circumstances, just about anything could qualify. All one has to have is a legally recognized disability, like depression or alcoholism.
So, when our local dog lover got a psychiatrist to diagnose him as depressed, the Association’s case turned into a real dog. To treat his depression, the owner’s doctor prescribed (you guessed it) a companion animal to improve his mood. As a result, the association had to make a reasonable accommodation by allowing an exception to its restriction regarding pet weights. Doing otherwise could have been considered discrimination against the disabled and invited various state and federal authorities to pursue the association like a pack of wild dogs. Needless to say, the case settled rather quickly at that point, though the association was able to recover a few bones for its attorney fees.
Kibble for Thought
Before beginning a full-blown lawsuit to enforce against an owner with pets, be aware that the facts can turn rather quickly. Had the owner not become depressed, the association could have virtually rolled over and played dead and still won the case. But, discrimination claims require a homeowners association to defend against the near limitless resources of the government and to put up with the political and social embarrassment of being labeled as a bigot. Most would agree that a homeowner association would have to be barking mad to take on that fight unnecessarily.
But if you think this case is an extreme example, think again. Other examples of strange pet cases abound. For instance, did you know a pony could be considered a pet and acceptable to live inside a condominium unit? Or that a 55 and older community with multiple accommodations for the disabled (ramps, wheelchair lift for the pool, automatic doors, etc.) could discriminate against people with disabilities when it tried to enforce a pet weight restriction against an owner with a dog accused of knocking over other residents?
The moral of the story: while pet restrictions are common they can be difficult to enforce. Obviously, every case is different, so consult with your association’s attorney before determining your course of action, and you will be sure to remain top dog in your community for years to come.
Copyright HG.org - Google+
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
Sadly, most people see their pets as members of the family, even when buying them will put the owner in direct violation of their association's covenants. So, asking someone to get rid of their pet, even though they should have known before buying or renting in the community that there was a weight restriction, is often the equivalent of asking that person to give away their child. In truth, some people prefer their pets to their kids! So, a fight is often inevitable, often with surprising outcomes.
Let the animal puns begin...
The Replacement Dog
In one case I handled, an owner had a Border Collie (a breed that averages between 30-45 pounds) in a community with a 25-pound weight limit for pets. The association asked us to begin legal proceedings against this owner to enforce the weight restriction. The litigation began to drag on for some time, with each side trying to be top dog (I warned you). In the midst of the legal wrangling, the dog in question...ahem...expired. In one of the more unusual tasks I ever performed during my legal career, I was asked by the client to call the veterinary clinic to confirm that the dog had, in fact, chased his last mailman and had passed into the great dog park in the sky. He had, and I thought I saw a sad, but mutually agreeable outcome to the lawsuit within our grasp.
I was wrong. In less than a month, the owner had bought a brand new Border Collie.
Now we were really stuck. The case would have to go all the way through to a final judgment and everyone knew it. This owner’s wife, distraught over her husband’s dogged (sorry) determination to thwart the association’s efforts to enforce its rules, left him. He fell behind on his bills, ate through his savings while paying his attorney’s fees, and was in jeopardy of going into mortgage foreclosure. The owner became depressed and this case was about to get a lot hairier (furrier?).
The Case Goes to the Dogs
While pets are not people, and thus, cannot trigger the anti-discriminatory policies of the Fair Housing Act or the various state and federal agencies set up to ensure equal housing rights, their owners are. If the owner has a disability they may be entitled to a “reasonable accommodation” to allow that person to live in the community. In case you are not already familiar with the concept, a large body of law requires associations to make “reasonable accommodations” for those with disabilities. What constitutes a “reasonable accommodation” is exceptionally broad and, under the right circumstances, just about anything could qualify. All one has to have is a legally recognized disability, like depression or alcoholism.
So, when our local dog lover got a psychiatrist to diagnose him as depressed, the Association’s case turned into a real dog. To treat his depression, the owner’s doctor prescribed (you guessed it) a companion animal to improve his mood. As a result, the association had to make a reasonable accommodation by allowing an exception to its restriction regarding pet weights. Doing otherwise could have been considered discrimination against the disabled and invited various state and federal authorities to pursue the association like a pack of wild dogs. Needless to say, the case settled rather quickly at that point, though the association was able to recover a few bones for its attorney fees.
Kibble for Thought
Before beginning a full-blown lawsuit to enforce against an owner with pets, be aware that the facts can turn rather quickly. Had the owner not become depressed, the association could have virtually rolled over and played dead and still won the case. But, discrimination claims require a homeowners association to defend against the near limitless resources of the government and to put up with the political and social embarrassment of being labeled as a bigot. Most would agree that a homeowner association would have to be barking mad to take on that fight unnecessarily.
But if you think this case is an extreme example, think again. Other examples of strange pet cases abound. For instance, did you know a pony could be considered a pet and acceptable to live inside a condominium unit? Or that a 55 and older community with multiple accommodations for the disabled (ramps, wheelchair lift for the pool, automatic doors, etc.) could discriminate against people with disabilities when it tried to enforce a pet weight restriction against an owner with a dog accused of knocking over other residents?
The moral of the story: while pet restrictions are common they can be difficult to enforce. Obviously, every case is different, so consult with your association’s attorney before determining your course of action, and you will be sure to remain top dog in your community for years to come.
Copyright HG.org - Google+
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
