4. If the building management believes that a resident’s request is not genuine, they are still required to respond, but they are allowed to request more information and proper documentation of the pet’s necessity. For example, when a resident makes a request for accommodations for an emotional support animal, the building is permitted to ask what disability the resident has that necessitates the animal, any medical documentation of said disability, or to contact the resident’s doctor directly. Often, doctors will write standard letters such as ‘the patient needs the animal to function daily,’ to which buildings are allowed to respond by asking for a more detailed explanation, with questions like ‘how does the animal aid the resident’s disability?’ Not all disabilities are visible, including the pet requests that are often made on a psychiatric basis. However, if a resident is visually disabled (i.e., in a wheelchair or visually impaired) then buildings are not allowed to request medical documentation of that disability, such requests can border on harassment of disabled individuals. If a resident has a documented disability and their doctor is willing to attest to the necessity of the animal, then buildings have very little recourse to deny them accommodations. Having represented clients who challenged the law in court and lost, I know firsthand that buildings have a very low likelihood of a court ruling in their favor.

5. There is one notable exception to these laws and regulations: if an accommodated pet disrupts other residents’ experience of the facility. In other words, pets that display disruptive or aggressive behavior can be denied accommodations. However, there is a very high bar of what constitutes disruptive behavior.  A resident with a reasonably behaved pet and a documented disability will most likely be granted “reasonable accommodations,” even by buildings that have strict no-pets policies.