Recent Court Cases - US

Abstract

This section surveys court decisions and significant filings from the first half of 2026 that bear on residential and commercial real estate appraisal practice. Entries are organized by the state in which the dispute arose or where the subject property is located. United States Tax Court decisions appear under the state of the subject property because, although their precedential effect is national, the factual record is state-specific.

Several cross-cutting themes are visible this year: continued judicial scrutiny of speculative highest- and-best-use claims in conservation easement valuations; an expanding body of fair housing litiga- tion against appraisers, appraisal management companies (AMCs), and lenders; renewed litigation testing the boundaries of property tax relief for pandemic-era access restrictions; and emerging class action litigation challenging the structure of AMC fees.

Scope and Sources

This survey is limited to court decisions and significant filings publicly reported through May 2026 in secondary sources, including law firm client alerts, Tax Notes, Bloomberg Tax, and the trade press. State trial court decisions, state appraiser board disciplinary actions, and decisions reported only in subscription legal-research databases (Westlaw, LexisNexis, Bloomberg Law) are not reflected. Case citations herein should be verified against primary sources—slip opinions, court dockets, or published reporters—before any reliance for practice or for further publication.

The first half of 2026 also saw legislative and assessment-policy activity not surveyed here, including Kansas Senate Concurrent Resolution 1603 (a proposed constitutional amendment capping annual taxable-value increases) and continued state-level development of “dark store” assessment doctrine following the August 2025 Kentucky Court of Appeals decision in Lowe’s Home Centers v. Arnold.

Federal Regulatory Context

Two regulatory developments in the first half of 2026 materially affect the litigation landscape for appraisers, though neither is itself a court decision. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has continued its retrenchment from disparate-impact enforcement following the April 2025 Executive Order, including the revocation of agency guidance specifically addressing appraisal bias, exclusionary zoning, environmental justice, and criminal-background-screening policies. The underlying Supreme Court precedent in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 576 U.S. 519 (2015), is unchanged, and disparate-impact liability under the Fair Housing Act therefore remains available to private plaintiffs.  Separately, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a 2026 update to its Equal Credit Opportunity Act rules removing disparate-impact liability in the ECOA enforcement context. Lenders and AMCs nonetheless continue to face regulatory and litigation risk from state-level enforcers and private parties.