Brown & Brown Insurance Brokerage Firm Settles Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit for $100,000
Daytona Beach-based insurance brokerage firm Brown & Brown will pay $100,000 and furnish significant relief to resolve a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced yesterday.
According to the EEOC's suit, Brown & Brown made a written job offer to the applicant and also sent her an employment agreement for a "personal lines technical assistant" position at its Daytona Beach location and proposed employment start dates. Upon receipt of the offer letter, the applicant affirmed her interest by email and sought to ask a few questions regarding the offer. About two hours later, the applicant spoke with the department leader's assistant and inquired about maternity benefits because she was pregnant. The assistant immediately advised the department leader of the applicant's pregnancy and, minutes later, according to the suit, the applicant received an email from the company rescinding the job offer, stating that it "had a very urgent need to have somebody in the position long term …We appreciate you telling us beforehand."
EEOC Sues Impressions Incorporated for Disability Discrimination
Impressions, Incorporated, a St. Paul-based design, printing and packaging company, violated federal law by requiring unlawful medical exams and then firing an employee because of his disability, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed yesterday.
According to Julianne Bowman, District Director for the EEOC's Chicago District office, who supervised the investigation preceding the lawsuit, Justin Cadmus had worked for ten years as a press helper for Impressions Incorporated and was rated a top performer. In 2014, Cadmus was diagnosed by his family doctor with depression. His supervisor became aware that he had ceased taking medication for the depression, and, in April 2015, told him to see a doctor and then to see a psychologist, and to go back on medication. Although Cadmus complied with these unlawful directives which were not justified by business necessity, he was fired because of his depression.
ADA Suit Against Steak 'n Shake Wins Class Approval
The Legal Intelligencer
A lawsuit alleging the Steak 'n Shake restaurant chain violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by not having adequate accessibility for handicapped patrons has been granted class action status.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell of the Western District of Pennsylvania granted lead plaintiffs Christopher Mielo and Sarah Heinzl's motion for class approval April 27 in their case against Steak 'n Shake Operations Inc.
The class includes "[a]ll persons with qualified mobility disabilities who were or will be denied the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations of any Steak 'n Shake restaurant location in the United States on the basis of a disability because such persons encountered accessibility barriers at Steak'n Shake restaurants where defendant owns, controls and/or operates the parking facilities."
State lawmakers tackle frivolous ADA lawsuits
First Coast News
A bill designed to protect businesses from frivolous lawsuits and help improve accessibility for those with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in Florida could soon become law. On Tuesday, the Florida Senate voted 37-to-0 on House Bill 727, sending it to Gov. Rick Scott's desk for final approval.
HB 727 was filed by Rep. Tom Leek of Daytona Beach in February. A part of it is designed to "give courts the necessary tools to reject attorneys' fees and costs to drive-by litigants" who claim businesses aren't following ADA guidelines, according to a press release.
Transit agencies sued over accessibility
New York Press
With less than 25 percent of subway stations accessible, New York City wheelchair users often face long, complicated commutes, and few alternative options. Class actions filed in state and federal courts against the MTA hope to
change that.
Lexology
Given recent high-profile lawsuits and investigations by the federal Department of Justice (DOJ) and an increasing number of private lawsuits, understanding your obligations under the ADA is critically important to avoiding costly lawsuits, as well as significant reputational damage.
The ADA broadly prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in offering educational programs. Purely online, non-traditional educational providers (captured under Title III of the ADA as “places of education”) and all types of on-the-ground or hybrid schools cannot exclude qualified individuals who claim a disability from any program or activity or deny such individuals the benefits of any program or activity. More significantly, they must provide such individuals with “auxiliary aids and services” as are reasonable to allow the students to benefit from the educational program. As a general principle, students with disabilities must be able to obtain the educational opportunities and benefits of a program or activity in a timely, equally effective and equally integrated manner. In addition to the federal requirements, many states have state-level disability discrimination and accommodation laws that many be an additional source of liability.
PODCAST - ADA Title III Public Accommodations: New Accessibility Considerations for Businesses
Lexology
Most business owners are aware that if their business is public-facing they need to provide access for the physically disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act. By definition, Title III under the ADA provides that individuals cannot be discriminated against on the basis of disability, “in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations of any place of accommodation by any person who owns, leases, leases to or operates a place of public accommodation.” While classically this includes what we would typically think of as public-facing businesses, such as movie theaters, restaurants, bowling alleys, and hospitals, it does also include private businesses, like doctors’ offices, accounting firms, and even non-profits.
In a podcast for Verrill Voices, attorneys Greg Fryer and Tawny Alvarez discuss ADA Title III public accommodations issues that businesses may not be aware of, such as accessibility features that public websites should have to maintain compliance, as well as what businesses should expect in terms of new regulations in the future.