Not always. The Appeals Court vacated an eviction judgment against a disabled tenant in subsidized housing because the judge may have rejected her reasonable accommodation defense only because she brought no medical records, and because the judge did not make findings on whether her request was reasonable. Her own testimony could be enough. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
The tenant rents an apartment in Wellesley with a federal housing subsidy. In 2021, the landlord brought an eviction case, and the parties signed an agreement that a Housing Court judge approved. It required the tenant to contact the landlord only through a professional third party except in an emergency, and to submit her subsidy recertification papers on time. The agreement said it satisfied all accommodation requests up to that date.
In December 2023, the landlord moved to enforce the agreement. It said the tenant sent the property manager many emails and did not respond to recertification notices. The tenant admitted the violations but asked for a reasonable accommodation. She testified that her disability had changed and caused the violations, and proposed regular mediation as a solution. When asked, she said she had not brought medical records but that they existed. The judge denied the accommodation, noting the lack of medical documentation, and entered judgment for possession in March 2024.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court vacated the judgment and sent the case back in PRI Glen Grove, LLC v. Laffan, No. 24-P-918 (Mass. App. Ct. September 1, 2026) (Rule 23.0 decision).
The appeal was allowed. The agreement said the parties waived all appeals and that any judgment would be dated back to 2021. The court held the tenant did not waive her right to raise an accommodation defense to a later breach, or to appeal the judgment enforcing the agreement. A judge also cannot backdate a judgment to defeat the 10-day appeal period in G.L. c. 239, § 5(a).
Agreements bind, but accommodation still applies. A court-approved agreement is a binding court order. Dacey v. Burgess, 491 Mass. 311, 315 (2023). But the tenant was not attacking the agreement. She made a new accommodation request based on changes in her disability, so the judge had to apply the reasonable accommodation framework. Cf. Boston Hous. Auth. v. Bridgewaters, 452 Mass. 833, 846-847 (2009) (tenant raised an accommodation request through his own testimony). Both the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B), and G.L. c. 151B, § 4(7A) require reasonable accommodations in rules and policies when needed for equal use of a home.
Testimony can show the link. The tenant had to show a connection between her disability and the accommodation. The court relied on federal HUD and Justice Department guidance from 2004, which says that in most cases medical records or detailed information about a disability are not needed. A person may give key testimony about her own disability. Castillo Condo. Ass’n v. U.S. Dep’t of Hous. & Urban Dev., 821 F.3d 92, 99 (1st Cir. 2016). The judge made no finding that the tenant was not credible, and her testimony was enough evidence for the judge to find a link. Because the judge may have rejected the defense only for lack of documents, the issue had to go back for clarification.
Reasonableness needed findings. The tenant must first prove her request is reasonable. Andover Hous. Auth. v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300, 307 (2005). The court explained that the burden then shifts to the landlord to show undue hardship. The judge never addressed the mediation proposal and found only that the emails hurt the landlord’s ability to manage the property. Some impact on a landlord may be part of accommodating a disability, so that finding was not enough. The court noted the judge may still weigh emails that were obscene, offensive or threatening. The court took no position on whether the tenant should ultimately win.
What this means for you
If you have a disability and signed a move-out or payment agreement, you may still be able to ask for an accommodation if your disability changes and that change makes it hard to follow the agreement. You do not always need a stack of medical records.
Still, bringing proof helps. A letter from a doctor, counselor, caseworker or other reliable person who knows your situation can make your request much stronger at the first hearing.
What to do now
- Ask for the accommodation in writing as soon as you know your disability is affecting your ability to follow the lease or agreement.
- Explain the link: what changed, how it caused the problem, and what change in rules would help.
- Propose a specific, workable solution, such as a different way to communicate or more time for paperwork.
- Bring supporting letters or records to every hearing, even if you think your testimony is enough.
- If a judgment enters, file your notice of appeal within 10 days of the date it is entered on the docket.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. Housing Court deadlines are short.
