Florida Dog Bite Law FirmFlorida is a condominium and association state, which makes this one of the most-asked and worst-answered questions in Florida dog law.
Two statutes are usually cited at it, and they do not work the same way. One binds governments. The other binds housing providers. Getting that backwards is where most of the confusion comes from.
Breed preemption binds local governments, not your HOA
Since 1 October 2023, no Florida local government may regulate dogs by breed, weight or size:
Read who that constrains. It is about what a local government may put in an ordinance. A homeowners association covenant is not a local government ordinance — it is a private contractual arrangement between the association and the owners.
So § 767.14 does not, by its terms, void a private HOA or condominium breed restriction. People assume it did, because the same 2023 bill was widely reported as “Florida bans breed bans.” It ended Miami-Dade’s ordinance and the City of Sunrise’s, both of which were government rules. The preemption picture in full.
One part of HB 941 did reach housing: it barred governmental public housing authorities from restricting dogs by breed, weight or size. Note the word governmental — that is a public body, not a private association.
⚠️ This is a textual reading, not settled authority. Whether a particular covenant survives is a question for a lawyer who has read it. What is clear is that “the state banned breed restrictions” is not by itself an answer to a private covenant.
Assistance animals are the other direction entirely
Where breed preemption probably does not reach an association, the assistance animal statute very likely does.
Section 760.27 governs housing providers, and defines the term by function rather than by listing entity types:
The statute does not name condominium associations, homeowners associations or cooperatives. It captures whoever is “engaging in conduct covered by” the federal Fair Housing Act. Many associations are — but whether a specific one is, on specific facts, is a legal question the statute does not answer for you.
Where it applies, the constraints are real:
- No extra charge. A person with a qualifying assistance animal “may not be required to pay extra compensation for such animal” — § 760.27(2). No pet fee, no pet deposit, no monthly pet rent.
- No diagnosis. A provider “may not request information that discloses the diagnosis or severity of a person’s disability or any medical records” — § 760.27(3)(a).
- A registration proves nothing. An ESA registration “of any kind… is not, by itself, sufficient information to reliably establish” disability or need — § 760.27(3)(c).
- Denial only for a direct threat posed by that specific animal — § 760.27(2)(a).
A service animal under § 413.08 is a different category again — trained task work, limited to dogs and miniature horses, and governed by a public-accommodation statute rather than a housing one.
So where does that leave a pet restriction?
Broadly, and subject to the covenant’s own terms:
| Restriction | Likely position |
|---|---|
| A local ordinance restricting breed, weight or size | Preempted since 1 Oct 2023 |
| A governmental public housing authority restricting breed, weight or size | Barred by HB 941 |
| A private HOA or condo covenant restricting breed | Not reached by § 767.14 by its terms |
| Any of the above applied to a qualifying assistance animal | Constrained by § 760.27 where the association is a housing provider |
| A fee or deposit for a qualifying assistance animal | Prohibited where § 760.27 applies |
The pattern: breed rules are a governments question, assistance animals are a housing providers question, and an association can be caught by the second while untouched by the first.
If an association has acted against you
Work out which question you are actually in, because they go to different places:
A breed or size restriction in a covenant. Read the covenant and check when it was adopted and how it is worded. Preemption is not the automatic answer people expect.
An assistance animal refused, or charged for. That is fair housing territory. A HUD-funded fair housing organisation operates in most Florida metros and this is precisely what they do.
A dog that has actually injured someone. Different question again, and a § 767.04 claim runs against the owner regardless of what the association’s rules say. Where a bite happened in a common area and the association knew about the dog, there may be a claim against the association too.
This firm handles injury claims — people hurt by dogs in Florida. We do not handle HOA or condominium disputes, covenant enforcement, or fair housing complaints. This page exists because “Florida banned breed bans” is repeated constantly and is not an answer to a private covenant. For a dispute with an association, a community association or fair housing attorney is the right call.