Third Circuit Hears Anash Inc v Borough of Kingston Case Update

• The Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in the appeal of Anash Inc and Rabbi Shimmon Hellinger's lawsuit against the Borough of Kingston, and the case is currently pending.
• A federal district court previously found that the borough did not have a duty to provide parking for the yeshiva, as it was not a public entity responsible for providing such services, and denied a preliminary injunction.
• The ongoing appeal may set a precedent for future cases involving municipal liability under federal law.
• The legal matter highlights the importance of understanding the scope of municipal liability under federal law.

However, the district court found that the ADA and FHA do not apply in this case, as the borough was not providing a public service or facility.

A federal appeals court heard oral arguments in the case of Anash Inc v. Borough of Kingston, which is currently pending. The lawsuit was brought by Anash Inc and Rabbi Shimmon Hellinger, alleging that the borough's failure to provide adequate parking for a yeshiva led to property damage and other issues. A Pennsylvania federal district court had previously refused to grant a preliminary injunction to the yeshiva, finding that the plaintiffs were not likely to succeed on the merits of their challenge to the zoning ordinance. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on January 22, 2026, regarding the appeal of the district court's decision. This ongoing appeal may set a precedent for future cases involving municipal liability.

The lawsuit in question was brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), both of which remain in force. The plaintiffs argued that the borough's failure to provide adequate parking for the yeshiva, which is a place of worship and education, constituted discrimination against people with disabilities. The district court, in denying the preliminary injunction, found that the ADA and FHA did not apply in this specific context, as the borough was not providing a public service or facility. This ongoing legal matter highlights the importance of understanding the scope of municipal liability under federal law.

This pending decision by the Third Circuit has significant implications for municipalities across the country. If the district court's reasoning is upheld, it could set a precedent for future cases involving municipal liability. Lawyers and compliance officers should take note of this ongoing appeal, as it may impact their clients' obligations to provide accessible facilities and services. The court's finding at the district level that the borough did not have a duty to provide parking for the yeshiva raises questions about the limits of municipal liability under federal law.

Lawyers and compliance officers should watch for potential implications on municipal liability in similar cases, as this Third Circuit Court decision may set a precedent for future rulings.

Source: Original reporting via Anash Inc v. Borough of Kingston