The Fourth Circuit revived a fair-housing claim against a community association
The Fourth Circuit revived a fair-housing claim against a community association
2026-09-19 · Virginia · Courts
A community association that had won summary judgment on fair-housing claims lost that win in the Fourth Circuit, and the case went back for a jury trial. Group Home on Gibson Island, LLC v. Gibson Island Corporation, No. 23-2295, was argued March 14, 2025 and decided July 15, 2025 in a published opinion.1
The association is on Maryland's Gibson Island. The precedent is binding on every federal court in Virginia.
Why a Maryland case is Virginia law
The Fourth Circuit covers Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. A published Fourth Circuit opinion construing the Fair Housing Act states the rule that the Eastern and Western Districts of Virginia must apply.
Most Virginia association fair-housing disputes never reach a Virginia state court, because the Fair Housing Act claim is federal and the defendant is typically better off there. So the federal appellate layer matters more to Virginia associations than its geography suggests.
What the court did
The panel vacated the grant of summary judgment to the association and remanded for trial, holding that a reasonable jury could find the association's land-use restrictions violated the Fair Housing Act's reasonable-accommodation, retaliation and disability-discrimination provisions in refusing to permit a group or assisted-living home. The United States appeared as amicus supporting the plaintiffs.
The posture is the point
This is a remand, not a liability finding. The association has not been held to have violated the Fair Housing Act. What it has lost is the ability to end the case without a trial.
That distinction is where the cost lives. Summary judgment is the mechanism by which an association with a defensible record avoids a jury, and a Fourth Circuit decision that a jury could find against an association on these facts raises the settlement value of every comparable claim in the circuit, Virginia included.
The three theories, and why they travel together
Reasonable accommodation. The Fair Housing Act requires a housing provider to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices or services when necessary to afford a person with a disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. A community association enforcing a declaration is within that duty; Virginia associations have been on notice of this for years.
Disability discrimination. A facially neutral residential-use restriction applied to exclude a group home raises the question whether the restriction is being used as a proxy.
Retaliation. This is the one association boards most often overlook. Section 3617 of the Act reaches coercion, intimidation, threats and interference with the exercise of Fair Housing Act rights. Enforcement activity that intensifies after an accommodation request is the classic factual pattern, and it survives even where the underlying denial is found lawful.
The Virginia layer sitting underneath
Virginia has its own fair-housing statute, enforced independently of the federal one, and its own assistance-animal provisions in the association Acts. Neither was amended in 2025 or 2026.
What did move is federal enforcement policy, and it moved in the opposite direction from this decision. HUD issued an internal enforcement memorandum dated May 22, 2026 directing its Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity to find reasonable cause only for accommodation requests involving animals specifically trained to provide disability-related assistance — a narrowing that would exclude emotional support animals from the assistance-animal category and supersede HUD's January 2020 guidance.2
An association reading those two developments together should note what the memorandum is and is not. It directs HUD's own case handling. It is not a regulation, it does not amend the Fair Housing Act, and it does not bind a federal court hearing a private claim.
The conditions that change the answer
Published and binding. A published Fourth Circuit opinion governs in Virginia's federal courts.
It is a summary-judgment ruling. The standard is whether a reasonable jury could find for the non-movant — a low bar, and one that says nothing final about liability.
The facts are group-home facts. Land-use restrictions applied to a group or assisted-living use are the specific context. Extending the reasoning to ordinary architectural enforcement is an argument, not a holding.
HUD's enforcement posture is not the law. An internal memorandum changes what HUD pursues, not what a private plaintiff may prove.
What to watch next
HUD has said it intends notice-and-comment rulemaking to align the assistance-animal definition with ADA standards. No such proposed rule has been located as filed. Until one exists, Virginia associations are operating under a federal appellate decision that widens exposure and an agency memorandum that narrows federal enforcement.
Related Virginia HOA Topics
Stay on top of Virginia HOA law
Every week: new Virginia legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.