Woman claims ADA violation by employer
The Pennsylvania Record
A sales administrator is suing GE Water & Process Technologies, an employer, citing alleged discrimination, failure to uphold Americans with Disabilities Act regulations and retaliation.
Barbara Barry filed a complaint on April 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against GE Water & Process Technologies alleging that the employer allegedly violated the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.
According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that upon her return from disability leave, and up to the time she filed an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge, she was subjected to harassment and ridicule by her supervisor, Cara Broadbelt. She allegedly was treated differently in terms and conditions of her employment. As a result of defendant's discrimination, she has suffered damages, she claims. The plaintiff holds GE Water & Process Technologies responsible because the defendant allegedly treated her differently from others in pursuing Family and Medical Leave Act claims.
The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks an order permanently enjoining the defendant from discriminating or retaliating against her, prohibiting the defendant from continuing its allegedly illegal policy, compensation for all damages and all other equitable relief as the court may deem just and proper. She is represented by Timothy M. Kolman, Wayne A. Elly and W. Charles Sipio of Kolman Ely PC in Pendell.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case number 2:16-cv-01937
Transgender Privilege and the Americans with Disabilities Act
American Thinker
The Administration has preposterously tried to defend its coercive “guidance” to local school districts as analogous to federal enforcement operations during the civil rights struggles of the 1950s and 1960s. In fact, the rationales and means employed bear a closer resemblance to the use and misuse of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) since its passage in 1990, by disability activist groups and wealthy and influential plaintiffs’ lawyers. It’s a case of the regulatory state simply picking and choosing rationales from smorgasbord of “rights” statutes to dictate to the people.
Partial settlement for disabled inmates suit approved with caveats
Montgomery Advertiser
A case that includes every prisoner in Alabama with any sort of disability – something reportedly unprecedented in the state – has received preliminary approval from U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson for a partial settlement.
“Most (Americans with Disabilities Act) cases tend to look at one particular type of disability,” said Maria Morris, a Southern Poverty Law Center attorney who represents the plaintiffs.
Morris said she has only been able to find one other case that matched this case’s scope in terms of covering every type of disability. It was filed in California nearly 20 years ago, and is still ongoing.
Increasing Legal Scrutiny of Website Accessibility in the Real Estate Industry
Lexology
From fair housing laws to licensing requirements, the real estate industry is accustomed to navigating various legal constraints and requirements. However, as a result of current ambiguity in the law, class action lawsuits based upon website accessibility pose an emerging threat to real estate brokers, lenders, homebuilders, and ultimately, any company that has a web presence. Today almost all companies have a website, which is often used as the primary method to provide information and to market to current and future clients. But what about clients and prospects that have disabilities? Do they have equal access to your company website?
If your company has not addressed this issue, it not only may be missing potential clients, but it also may be a target for plaintiffs’ attorneys who are eager to capitalize on the current unsettled state of the law by bringing a class action lawsuit.
A wave of ADA lawsuits has hit Chicago. Are lawyers abusing the law?
Chicago Tribune
The Tribune recently reported on an Americans with Disability Act lawsuit involving a plaintiff from New Orleans who believes the McDonald’s company late-night drive-thru policies discriminate against the blind because only motorists are served there during late-night hours.
The lawsuit has been filed in federal court in Chicago. This is really not surprising, because we have seen a wave of ADA lawsuits coming to the Chicago area.
One woman, who owns a flower shop on North LaSalle Street in Chicago, saw her neighbor hit with an ADA lawsuit, and then her store was hit as well. All told, 14 shops in her neighborhood were targeted with ADA lawsuits.