I'm not aware of a specific court case dealing with an inspector, but based on my interpretation of the statute and court cases, the answer is "probably yes."

It's a question of knowing not only the law but how the court is likely interpret it (case law - maybe not the same as your opinion / conclusion).That said, you came here for help "figuring things out".

We cant exclude the tenant based on breed or weight even though our insurer will cancel coverage.Is this a correct interpretation of the law and have you run into this before. 

Think the opinion of issue on shower is overblown and people are making it seem like a huge water risk or major malfunction etc..... my interpretation of what the issue is relates to when you pull the bath faucet to get the water to divert to the shower head, not 100% of the water is getting diverted....some still comes through the faucet...how much are we talking here?

As for Fair Housing Act, I'm pretty sure "the previously evicted" are not a protected class, and even if one were to argue that they were being discriminated against because they belong to a "disparately affected" group (i.e. disqualifying all people with crimes as per the interpretation ruling a couple of years ago), we don't ask protected class questions and state clearly before anyone even bothers filling out an application that evictions are disqualifiers.

Most of the time the interpretation is "marketing with a listing service" and honestly to me that's just the legal way of saying "you can't put the property on the MLS" LOL. 

If you as an agent (not a broker) form an LLC/S-corp, that LLC/S-corp cannot be licensed in MA.If my interpretation is correct, then your brokerage cannot issue commissions and a 1099 to your LLC/S-corp, only to you, under your personal SSN.2.

Only one other federal circuit had considered this issue, but HUD’s rules could impose liability on a housing provider when a third-party is creating a hostile environment for a resident that the housing provider is on notice about but fails to take prompt action.The court accepted HUD’s interpretation of the FHA in its rules and ruled that a housing provider could be liable for failing to prevent tenant-on-tenant discrimination when it is on notice that the discrimination is occurring.

The ability to properly interpret the data is almost as important as the data itself.Edit: Sorry I should have posted in the Washington DC category.

Of course, I am I'm paraphrasing here, and I may have interpreted what he said incorrectly, but I don't think so.