Alisha Bronk and Monica Jay v. Bernhard Ineichen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reasoning that if the dog “was not necessary as a hearing dog, then his presence in the townhouse was not necessarily a reasonable accommodation”
• reasoning that \a deaf individual's need for the accommodation afforded by a hearing dog\ is \ per se reasonable within the meaning of the [Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988]\
• finding that the plaintiff’s request for a companion animal was not “reasonable” or “necessary”
• “the concept of necessity requires at a minimum the showing that the desired accommodation will affirmatively enhance a disabled plaintiff’s quality of life by ameliorating the effects of the disability”
• “concept of necessity requires at a minimum the showing that the desired accommodation will affirmatively enhance a disabled plaintiffs quality of life by ameliorating the effects of the disability”
• deaf tenant's need to keep a hearing dog at rental property as an accommodation was reasonable within the meaning of the statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).