Disabled community responds to ADA lawsuits
Hanford Sentinel
Proposed federal legislation that would give small businesses 90 days to respond to lawsuits over their compliance with the American with Disabilities Act has largely been welcomed by small businesses.
People with disabilities could lose jobs due to state funding cuts
Valley News Live
A lack of funding is leading to cuts at developmental activity centers across Minnesota. In some cases, leaving them on the verge of being shut down, leaving people with disabilities without a job.
JD Supra
In the recent Castro-Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express, Inc. decision, the court held that under the California's Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"), employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations for employees who are associated with a person with a disability. The appellate court's decision confirms that California employers must consider requests for accommodations by employees who are associated with an individual who suffers from a qualifying disability.
BarBri Sued Over Allegedly Inaccessible Bar Review Site
Bloomberg BNA
Nationwide bar preparation course provider BarBri Inc. has prevented blind law students from adequately preparing for bar exams by maintaining accessibility barriers to its website and mobile application, according to a complaint filed April 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Blind law students file suit against Dallas bar exam prep company
Dallas Morning News
Dallas-based BarBri Inc. continues to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to properly accommodate blind law students who use BarBri’s online and other services to prepare for the bar exam, a lawsuit filed Monday in Dallas federal court claims.
In a class action lawsuit, three named plaintiffs are asking the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to order BarBri, the largest bar exam preparation course provider in the country, to adjust its services to fully accommodate blind law students and to compensate the dozens to hundreds of affected blind students that have each paid thousands of dollars to use BarBri’s prep courses.
The three named plaintiffs, Claire Stanley, Derek Manners and Christopher Stewart, plan to take the July bar exam, which they need to pass to become licensed lawyers. Stanley, a May 2015 graduate of the University of California Irvine School of Law, also took the Pennsylvania bar exam last July but did not pass.
S. Philly restaurant owner accused of violating Disabilities Act
Philly.com
Federal prosecutors have sued a South Philadelphia restaurant owner, accusing him of violating the Americans With Disabilities Act.
The suit, filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, alleges that John Longacre repeatedly failed to respond to prosecutors' requests about accessibility at his South Philadelphia Tap Room, 1509 Mifflin St. It says the Tap Room's front entrance and restrooms, among other things, are not readily accessible to people with disabilities.
Boeing Shows How You Handle an ADA Complaint
Corporate Counsel
It’s well-known that employers are required to engage in a “good faith interactive dialogue” with an employee requesting accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act. But this obligation also applies to the employee. Workers who act unreasonably won’t get any sympathy from the courts, as a recent case against Boeing Co. illustrates.
The plaintiff was an industrial engineer at Boeing. She was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome and asked for some specific accommodations at work, such as having instructions written out. The company complied with the request but also put her on involuntary medical leave to evaluate her condition.
Subsequently, she requested a number of contradictory accommodations at work, as well as some extraordinary requests, such as a personal assistant to accompany her to an independent medical evaluation. She was eventually terminated. After her termination, she brought an ADA discrimination and retaliation case.
EDITORIAL: Help for victims of ADA-based extortion
Press-Enterprise
The Americans with Disabilities Act was intended to prohibit discrimination against people with physical or mental impairments and to improve access for the disabled to public accommodations. Too often, however, it has been used to shake down businesses for minor violations, such as a door sign affixed an inch too high or too low or a disabled parking logo that is a little too faded or painted in the wrong shade of blue.
California is a particular magnet for extortionary ADA litigation, thanks to state law which mandates a minimum $4,000 penalty for each violation – no matter how small – plus the plaintiff’s attorney fees. It is home to about 12 percent of the country’s disabled population, but accounts for 40 percent of ADA lawsuits. Its disability access lawsuits were one of the main reasons the American Tort Reform Foundation once again named California the nation’s No. 1 “Judicial Hellhole” last year.
Several legislative proposals would reform the system simply by requiring the aggrieved party to submit its complaints about alleged ADA violations to business owners in writing, and then allowing businesses a reasonable amount of time, usually 90 or 120 days, to fix any problems before litigation could be filed. Such federal bills include Rep. Ken Calvert’s, R-Corona, H.R. 241, the ACCESS Act of 2015, and Rep. Jerry McNerney’s, D-Stockton, H.R. 4719, the COMPLI Act.
At the state level, Senate Bill 1142 has been introduced by state Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa, and Sen. Richard Roth, D-Riverside, has proposed SB269. Both bills have been named among the California Chamber of Commerce’s 12 “job creator” bills this year.
Nitpicky standards about whether a sink or a mirror is a fraction of an inch off or an “outdated” sign is the wrong shape or color go well beyond the original intentions of the ADA. They cost business owners tens of thousands of dollars for minor repairs, killing jobs and entire businesses in the process.
Legislators should explore eliminating some of the most restrictive regulations, particularly those that do not actually affect accessibility. In the meantime, it is only fair that businesses are afforded the opportunity to correct violations, which will dissuade frivolous lawsuits while encouraging corrections for legitimate claims.
It's time for California to curb enthusiasm for ADA lawsuit abuse
LA Daily News
The Americans with Disabilities Act, adopted in 1990, was intended to prohibit discrimination against those with physical or mental impairments and improve access for the disabled to public accommodations.
Too often, however, it has been used to shake down businesses for minor violations — a sign affixed an inch too high or too low on a door, for example, or a disabled parking logo that is a little too faded or painted in the wrong shade of blue.
California is a particular magnet for frivolous ADA litigation, thanks to state law which mandates a minimum $4,000 penalty for each violation — no matter how small — plus the plaintiff’s attorney fees. The state is home to about 12 percent of the country’s disabled population, but accounts for a whopping 40 percent of ADA lawsuits nationwide. Its disability access lawsuits were one of the main reasons the American Tort Reform Foundation once again named California the No. 1 “Judicial Hellhole” in the nation last year.