Skip to content

Illinois laws and regulations topic guide

Illinois Assistance Animal Integrity Act

A tenant asks to keep an emotional-support cat in a no-pet building. The first question is what the housing provider already knows about the disability and the need for the cat. From there, Illinois law sets limits on documentation, charges and any proposed denial.

Last reviewed:

The short answer

Under the Illinois Assistance Animal Integrity Act, a qualifying service or emotional-support animal is a housing accommodation. A provider may request reliable documentation only when the disability or animal-related need is not apparent or known. Required support must be written, come from someone with a therapeutic relationship and describe the disability-related need. No specific diagnosis, pet fee, pet deposit or special animal liability policy is required. Actual damage beyond reasonable wear may still be charged through the ordinary resident-damage process.

This page explains 310 ILCS 120 for the Illinois broker exam. The June 24, 2026 PSI outline lists it in Illinois III.H, within Additional Illinois Laws and Regulations. The broader area has about 10 of 40 state questions; that is not an allocation to this Act alone. Federal enforcement policy and Illinois statutory duties are separate issues.

How to evaluate an Illinois assistance-animal question

  1. Identify the housing request. The Act covers residential decision makers including owners, managers, condominium associations, cooperatives, government entities and their agents. The animal must qualify as a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act or Illinois Human Rights Act. Ordinary companionship alone does not establish a disability-related need.
  2. Separate disability from animal need. If both are apparent or already known, do not request documentation of them again. If only the animal's connection is unclear, seek support for that missing connection. A visible disability does not automatically explain the need for every requested animal.
  3. Check the documentation when it may be requested. Section 10(b) calls for a writing, a therapeutic relationship and a description of the disability-related animal need. Section 5 requires good-faith medical, program or personal-care services and actual knowledge. The source can be a medical professional, mental-health provider, nonmedical service agency or reliable third party meeting that definition.
  4. Follow up on a genuine gap. Additional supporting documentation is allowed when the initial material does not meet Section 10(b). If the relationship is unclear, ask for information describing it. Section 10(h) permits authenticity checks. Neither step authorizes a specific diagnosis demand or a request for an entire medical file. Do not deny a request just because compliant documentation came in a letter rather than the provider's form.
  5. Use the statutory denial grounds. Section 10(c) addresses an undue financial and administrative burden or a fundamental alteration. Animal-specific grounds require reliable objective evidence after an individualized assessment: a direct threat or substantial physical damage that another reasonable accommodation cannot reduce or eliminate, or a pattern of uncontrolled behavior the handler has not effectively corrected.
  6. Handle money separately. Approval cannot depend on a pet-related deposit, fee, assessment or special animal liability insurance. If the animal later causes repairable damage to a unit or common area beyond reasonable wear, the provider may use the same damage process applied to other residents. An anticipated pet surcharge and an actual repair invoice are different charges.
  7. Keep the federal update in context. HUD withdrew its 2013 and 2020 animal notices effective September 17, 2025. Its May 22, 2026 memo limits FHEO cause findings and recommended charges to animal cases involving trained disability-related assistance. That enforcement policy is not an amendment to 310 ILCS 120, which expressly includes qualifying emotional-support animals. The memo preserves private court actions and does not address Section 504 or ADA complaint processing.
What the provider may ask, charge or consider
IssueIllinois ruleLimit
Both disability and animal need are knownNo new documentation of those factsDo not demand a diagnosis or purchased animal certificate.
Nonapparent needReliable written support from a therapeutic sourceAsk about the missing disability-related connection, not unrelated medical history.
Two or more animalsNeed for each may be documented unless apparentNo automatic one-animal cap and no automatic approval of any number.
Provider's preferred formThe provider may request itCompliant documentation in another format cannot be rejected just for the format.
Animal-specific safety or damage concernObjective evidence and individualized assessmentBreed reputation or unsupported fear is insufficient; consider mitigation where required.
Pet package or animal insuranceNo pet-related charges or special liability policyActual damage beyond reasonable wear is handled like other resident damage.
Another resident's documented disabilityAttempt to balance all residents' disability-related needsThe other resident's need alone is not an automatic veto.
Federal enforcement changeHUD memo governs its stated enforcement approachDo not substitute that memo for Illinois statutory text.

Work through the facts

The need is apparent

An applicant who is blind uses a guide dog and asks the property manager to waive the building's no-animal rule. The manager demands a diagnosis and an online animal certificate.

  1. Both disability and the guide dog's role are apparent on the stated facts.
  2. Section 10 does not permit a fresh disability-proof demand in that situation.
  3. A purchased certificate or specific diagnosis is not an approval condition.

Answer: The manager should process the accommodation without demanding disability documentation or a purchased certificate.

A nonapparent emotional-support need

A tenant requests an exception for an emotional-support cat. Neither the disability nor the animal's role is apparent. A counselor who has provided ongoing care writes that the tenant has a disability and describes how the cat lessens a disability-related effect, without naming the diagnosis.

  1. Reliable support may be requested because the relevant facts are not apparent.
  2. The counselor's ongoing care and actual knowledge establish the stated therapeutic relationship.
  3. The writing describes the disability-related connection without revealing a diagnosis.

Answer: The letter supplies the stated documentation elements. The provider must still evaluate the accommodation, rather than demand a diagnosis.

The request did not use the form

A condominium association provides a two-page animal form. A resident instead sends a letter and reliable documentation that meets every Section 10 requirement. The board denies the request solely because the form is blank.

  1. The association is a housing provider.
  2. Section 10 permits requesting a form but bars form-only rejection of compliant documentation.
  3. Evaluate the substance of the submission.

Answer: The form-only denial is improper. The association must evaluate the compliant alternative submission.

Breed is not objective conduct

A manager denies an otherwise supported dog because the insurer's website calls the breed dangerous. The dog has no known aggressive behavior, and the manager does not seek an insurance accommodation or examine alternatives.

  1. A breed label is not objective evidence about this dog's actual conduct.
  2. IDHR directs providers facing an insurance restriction to work with the resident on requesting an accommodation from the carrier.
  3. Insurance concerns require a fact-based analysis; they do not make stereotypes an adequate animal-specific assessment.

Answer: The breed-only denial is unsupported on these facts. Investigate the actual concern and available accommodation rather than impose an automatic exclusion.

Damage after approval

A properly approved assistance animal damages a common-area door. The repair invoice is $480. The building did not charge an animal deposit and uses the same documented damage process for all residents.

  1. A door repair is an actual damage issue, not a fee for animal status.
  2. Section 10(f) excludes reasonable wear and tear and requires the ordinary resident-damage process.
  3. Waiving a pet deposit does not excuse later damage.

Answer: The provider may seek the documented $480 repair cost through its ordinary resident-damage process.

Mistakes to avoid

  • Every requester must provide a doctor's diagnosis. Documentation is limited to nonapparent or unknown facts, a therapeutic source need not always be a physician, and no specific diagnosis is required.
  • Only a licensed medical doctor can write reliable support. The definition also includes other medical professionals, mental-health providers, nonmedical service agencies, and reliable third parties with the required actual knowledge and good-faith service relationship.
  • Every online letter is invalid. The medium alone does not decide validity. The key is a meaningful assessment and genuine therapeutic relationship, not a document issued without actual knowledge.
  • The resident must use the property manager's form. The provider may request the form but cannot deny solely because compliant material arrived in another format.
  • Housing assistance animals must be trained dogs. Residential housing law can include emotional-support animals and is not limited to the narrower ADA public-accommodation service-animal concept.
  • A restricted breed can always be denied. Animal-based denial requires reliable objective evidence about the specific animal after an individualized assessment and consideration of mitigation.
  • A normal refundable pet deposit is allowed. The Act prohibits pet-related deposits, fees, and assessments for an assistance animal, even if ordinary pet owners pay them.
  • No deposit means no liability for damage. Actual animal-caused repair costs beyond reasonable wear and tear can be recovered in the same manner as damage caused by another resident.
  • Provider immunity erases every lawsuit involving the animal. The immunity is for injuries caused by an assistance animal permitted as an accommodation. Other civil-rights liabilities remain expressly preserved.
  • HUD changed its policy, so Illinois emotional-support animals are now ordinary pets. Read the Illinois statute. The federal enforcement memo does not repeal its definition, fee prohibition or accommodation process.

Check your understanding

These are original teaching questions, not recalled or predicted PSI questions. Answer first, then explain why the other choices fail.

1. A resident's mobility disability is known. The resident requests an emotional-support cat, but the disability-related need for the cat is not apparent. What may the manager seek?

  1. A complete medical record and specific diagnosis
  2. A purchased registration certificate as the only acceptable proof
  3. Nothing, because any known disability automatically establishes the need for every animal
  4. Reliable documentation limited to the disability-related need that is not apparent or known
Show answer and explanation

Answer: D. Reliable documentation limited to the disability-related need that is not apparent or known

Disability and the animal's role are separate facts. Section 10(a) permits support for the missing connection, while Section 10(g) does not require a specific diagnosis. Registration is not a substitute for the therapeutic documentation, and a known disability does not establish every animal need.

2. A resident submits a written letter from a counselor with actual knowledge through ongoing care. It describes the disability-related animal need but omits a diagnosis and the manager's preferred form. Which response fits Section 10?

  1. Deny solely because the manager's form was not used
  2. Demand a specific diagnosis before reviewing the letter
  3. Treat any counselor letter as guaranteed final approval regardless of other facts
  4. Evaluate the compliant documentation and accommodation request
Show answer and explanation

Answer: D. Evaluate the compliant documentation and accommodation request

The stated writing, relationship and description meet the documentation elements. Neither a diagnosis nor the preferred form is mandatory. This resolves the documentation issue; it does not erase the separate reasonableness and properly supported denial analysis.

3. Which distinction matters most when assessing a letter issued through an online service under the Illinois Act?

  1. Whether the letter has a decorative animal registration seal
  2. Whether the animal's name appears in capital letters
  3. Whether the website charged any fee at all
  4. Whether good-faith services, actual knowledge and a meaningful assessment establish the required therapeutic relationship
Show answer and explanation

Answer: D. Whether good-faith services, actual knowledge and a meaningful assessment establish the required therapeutic relationship

Section 5 excludes paper-only certification without meaningful assessment. It does not impose a blanket ban based on online delivery or charge a resident for proving status. The relevant relationship and knowledge matter; a seal or formatting choice cannot establish them.

4. After approving an assistance animal, a provider receives an invoice for $480 of animal-caused door damage beyond reasonable wear. Which charge may it pursue under the same damage process used for other residents?

  1. A mandatory special liability policy for the animal
  2. Pet rent backdated to approval
  3. A new $480 animal deposit instead of the repair cost
  4. The documented repair cost
Show answer and explanation

Answer: D. The documented repair cost

Section 10(f) permits actual repair costs in the ordinary manner while prohibiting pet-related deposits, fees, assessments and special animal liability coverage. The accommodation does not erase damage responsibility, but it does bar relabeling a pet surcharge as an approval condition.

5. Which facts best support the animal-specific direct-threat ground for denial or rescission under Section 10(c)?

  1. A general warning that the breed can be dangerous
  2. Reliable objective evidence after an individualized assessment that this animal poses a threat no other reasonable accommodation can reduce or eliminate
  3. An unsupported fear reported by a neighbor
  4. The owner's preference for a building without animals
Show answer and explanation

Answer: B. Reliable objective evidence after an individualized assessment that this animal poses a threat no other reasonable accommodation can reduce or eliminate

The statute requires a specific assessment, reliable evidence and the stated mitigation limit for the direct-threat ground. General fear, breed reputation and owner preference do not supply those elements. Other statutory grounds must likewise be established on their own facts.

6. A tenant requests a second assistance animal whose separate disability-related role is not apparent. What does the Illinois Act permit?

  1. A fixed one-animal maximum in every case
  2. Automatic approval of the second animal because the first was approved
  3. Documentation establishing the disability-related need for the second animal, followed by an individualized evaluation
  4. A pet deposit for the second animal
Show answer and explanation

Answer: C. Documentation establishing the disability-related need for the second animal, followed by an individualized evaluation

Section 10(a) allows documentation of the need for each animal unless apparent. Approval of one animal does not prove every further need. There is no automatic one-animal cap, and assistance-animal status cannot be conditioned on a pet deposit.

7. An Illinois manager reads HUD's May 22, 2026 animal enforcement memo. What is the best conclusion for an Illinois emotional-support animal request?

  1. Pet fees become lawful for every Illinois emotional-support animal
  2. The memo automatically repeals the Illinois Act
  3. Apply the Illinois statutory accommodation rules; the memo describes HUD's enforcement approach and does not amend them
  4. Every pending request must now be denied without review
Show answer and explanation

Answer: C. Apply the Illinois statutory accommodation rules; the memo describes HUD's enforcement approach and does not amend them

A federal enforcement memo does not itself amend Illinois statutory definitions and protections. The state Act expressly includes qualifying emotional-support animals and prohibits pet-related charges. Do not turn a change in HUD cause findings into a blanket state-law denial or fee rule.

Common questions

What does the Illinois Assistance Animal Integrity Act do?

The Act sets rules for evaluating assistance-animal housing requests. It defines covered animals and providers, limits documentation demands, states denial grounds, prohibits pet-related charges and special animal insurance, and addresses damage and provider injury immunity. Its source act, Public Act 101-518, took effect January 1, 2020. Section 20 preserves other civil-rights protections and liabilities.

Is an assistance animal a pet under Illinois housing law?

No. Under the Act, an assistance animal is an emotional-support or service animal that qualifies as a reasonable accommodation under the federal Fair Housing Act or Illinois Human Rights Act. It is permitted because of a disability-related need, not under the property's ordinary pet policy. This is why pet fees, pet deposits, breed assumptions, and pet-only rules cannot simply be applied to a qualifying assistance animal.

When can an Illinois housing provider request documentation?

Only when the disability or disability-related need is not readily apparent or already known. Ask for the missing information, not proof of facts already established. For multiple animals, Section 10(a) permits documentation of the need for each unless apparent. If the initial material misses a Section 10(b) element, limited follow-up is allowed; authenticity may also be checked.

What must assistance-animal documentation contain in Illinois?

When documentation is lawfully requested, Section 10 requires it to be in writing, made by a person who has a therapeutic relationship with the requester, and describe the person's disability-related need for the assistance animal. The Act does not require disclosure of a specific diagnosis. If the initial material does not satisfy those elements, the provider may seek additional support limited to the missing information.

What is a therapeutic relationship under the Illinois Act?

It requires good-faith medical, program or personal-care services and actual knowledge of the person's disability and animal need. The source may be a medical professional, mental-health provider, nonmedical service agency or reliable third party meeting the definition. A certificate issued without meaningful assessment is excluded. Online delivery alone neither establishes nor defeats a genuine relationship.

Must a person use a landlord's assistance-animal form?

No. A housing provider may ask the person to make the request on a standardized form, but cannot deny a request merely because the person used another method and submitted documentation that satisfies the Act. The exam distinction is a form may organize the process, but it cannot become a procedural barrier to a valid accommodation request.

Can an Illinois housing provider deny an assistance animal?

Section 10(c) permits denial of a documented request or rescission for the specified undue financial and administrative burden or fundamental alteration. It also permits animal-specific grounds established through individualized assessment and reliable objective evidence: an unmitigable direct threat, unmitigable substantial physical damage, or a pattern of uncontrolled behavior the handler has not effectively corrected. A breed label or unsupported fear does not establish those facts. The express mitigation wording applies to the threat and substantial-damage grounds; the uncontrolled-behavior ground asks whether the handler has taken effective corrective action.

Can an Illinois landlord charge an assistance-animal fee or deposit?

No. The Act prohibits a pet-related deposit, pet fee, or related pet assessment for an assistance animal, even when ordinary pet owners pay those charges. It also prohibits requiring special liability insurance or coverage for the animal. The resident may still be charged for repair of actual animal damage, beyond reasonable wear and tear, in the same manner as any other resident.

Are emotional-support animals limited to dogs in Illinois housing?

No. Illinois defines an assistance animal to include a service or emotional-support animal qualifying as a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act or Illinois Human Rights Act. IDHR's housing guidance does not require the animal to be a dog or have special certification or training. The animal must still meet the individual disability-related need and reasonableness requirements. Do not replace this Illinois test with an ADA public-access rule.

Did HUD's 2026 changes repeal Illinois emotional-support animal protections?

No. HUD's older 2013 and 2020 notices were withdrawn effective September 17, 2025. Its May 22, 2026 memo narrows FHEO cause findings and recommended charges to cases involving animals trained for disability-related assistance. It expressly preserves private court actions and excludes Section 504 and ADA complaint processing from its scope. Those federal policy changes do not themselves amend Illinois's statute.

What if another resident has a documented animal allergy or disability-related fear?

Section 10(e) permits considering the other resident's documented disability-related need, but forbids denial solely on that basis. The provider must attempt to balance all residents' disability-related needs. Consider the actual facts and workable arrangements. Neither an unsupported objection nor an automatic preference for either resident supplies the required analysis.

Does housing-provider immunity excuse an improper denial?

No. Section 15 addresses injuries caused by an assistance animal permitted as a reasonable accommodation on the property. Section 20 preserves liability under the listed civil-rights laws. The injury provision is not blanket immunity for discriminatory decisions, and it does not erase the resident's ordinary responsibility for actual animal damage.

Keep practising

Your next practice step

Put fair housing into practice

Identify the protected characteristic, covered conduct and applicable exception.

Try fair housing questionsExplore the optional app

These web resources are free. The app has a separate free starter tier and optional paid full access.

Official sources and scope

Reviewed October 24, 2026 against the cited Illinois statutory text, IDHR guidance and federal policy documents. Direct ILGA retrieval failed, so indexed legislative text was cross-checked with the current Act listing. The signed HUD memo was read in an agency-document copy hosted by DREDF. Withdrawn notices are not used as current authority. These are original study questions, not PSI questions or advice on a particular accommodation.

This is exam preparation, not advice for a specific transaction. State law and the applicable facts control. Our editorial and corrections process explains how to report an issue.

Was this guide useful?

Choose one response. You can add a short note, especially if a rule, example, or explanation needs work. No name or email is requested.