This question piqued my curiosity and interest - I read all of the cogent sections (discrimination defined and prohibited) and found NO references to any kind of "assistance" animals, including seeing-eye dogs. This is not to say that somewhere, someplace, there hasn't been a ruling of some type on this subject. However, my general sense is - REGARDLESS of WHATEVER the reason for having the animal, the fact is - animals DO urinate, defecate, shed, and occasionally destroy fixtures and furnishings. Regardless of the reason for their necessity to the "disabled" individual, there is no logical reason that the property owner must shoulder the costs and burden of cleaning/fixing up after damages done by ANY animal - regardless of their medical "necessity" or not.