AUSTIN, Texas -- Short-term rental owners hope a Texas Supreme Court ruling Friday sets the stage for their challenge against vacation rental regulations.

"We reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion," said Justice Jeff Brown in the case of Tarr v. Timberwood Park Owners Association. "So long as the occupants to whom (Kenneth) Tarr rents his single-family residence use the home for a 'residential purpose,' no matter how short-lived, neither their on-property use nor Tarr’s off-property use violates the restrictive covenants in the Timberwood deeds."

IN-DEPTH | Tarr v. Timberwood Ruling

Joel Rasmussen owns a handful of furnished rental properties in South Austin. Since he doesn't live in any of them and does not require long-term lease agreements for his tenants, the City of Austin considers all of them non-owner-occupied--or commercial--vacation rentals.

"(The tenants) need to establish residency, so they stay for three months," he said. "They might stay for 15 months. The unifying characteristic of these rentals is that they are furnished."

MORE | King William residents want guidelines for short-term rentals

Keeping them in compliance requires him to pay the City of Austin for permits, ensure his homes meet strict building requirements and allow city inspectors unwarranted access to his properties. In addition, the city's 2016 ordinance will require Rasmussen and owners like him to sell or convert their properties to long-term rentals by 2022. Otherwise, they can leave them vacant.

He's encouraged by the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of Tarr. Chance Weldon is one of the attorneys representing a series of homeowners on behalf of the Texas Public Policy Foundation in a lawsuit seeking to strike down Austin's short-term rental ordinance.

"Something doesn't cease to be residential just because money changes hands," Weldon said. "I think that's a big victory for property owners in Texas. The City's position in its brief was, of course, that Tarr was dispositive. That's the only case they cite in their brief."

RELATED | Austin vacation rental owners roused by Paxton support in lawsuit

A spokesman for the City of Austin said the city did not have a statement regarding the Supreme Court ruling. However, that spokesman said the Tarr case challenged a deed restriction, which is different from the city ordinance at the center of the Austin case.

Both sides have submitted their briefs in the City of Austin challenge to the Texas Court of Appeals. The Texas Public Policy Foundation plans to file its response next week. No matter the outcome, that case is also expected to be taken to the Texas Supreme Court.