Maine Human Rights Commission v. D&L Apartments

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a Superior Court judgment for the Maine Human Rights Commission finding that D&L Apartments and its owner violated the Maine Human Rights Act when the owner told a veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder, who anticipated obtaining an assistance dog, that no dogs—including service dogs—were permitted and that he should not bother applying. The court held that a landlord's blanket no-service-animal statement is a statement of "preference, limitation or discrimination based upon . . . physical or mental disability" under 5 M.R.S. § 4581-A(1)(C), and that, under federal Fair Housing Act case law, no showing of subjective intent to discriminate is required. The court further held that 5 M.R.S. § 4582-A(3)'s prohibition on refusing "to permit the use of a service animal" unambiguously applies to prospective use of a service animal, because the present-use limiting language in the statute's second clause does not carry into the first clause.