Today’s blog entry talks about a case that is not an ADA case at all. However, I do expect the case to have a huge impact on a particular area of ADA jurisprudence. As we know, such as discussed here, there has been considerable debate in the courts over whether failure to accommodate cases require an additional adverse action on top of the failure to accommodate. Some cases say yes to that. Others say no to that. Still others, say that the failure to accommodate is an adverse action in and of itself. On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court in a unanimous opinion decided the case of ..read more

Today’s blog entry discusses the DOJ Title II final rule on web accessibility, including mobile apps. The final rule can be found here. As usual, a blog entry is divided into categories, and they are: 1) the actual regulations; and 2) highlights of DOJ response to comments and thoughts/takeaways   I Actual Regulations   PART 35—NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 35 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510; 42 U.S.C. 12134, 12131, and 12205a. Subpart A—General 2. Amend ..read more

I have been absolutely slammed this week, which is why I am so late in getting a blog entry up for the week. Before getting started on the blog entry for the day, I do want to mention that the Department of Justice has now issued a final rule on website accessibility involving Title II entities, which are nonfederal governmental entities. The rule is over 326 pages, including discussion of the comments that were submitted and DOJ’s response. As you can imagine, that will take me some time to weed through. I do plan to blog on that.   The blog entry of the day is Akridge v. Alfa Insurance ..read more

    Bill and his service animal Hope everyone had a great Easter weekend. The blog of the week is actually a two-for-one. We will discuss an update to a previous blog entry, here. After that, we will discuss a decision from a Colorado appellate court clarifying the rules with respect to service animals, Stalder v. Colorado Mesa University, here.   First off, we turn to the Fifth Circuit case in Lartigue v. Northside Independent School District. It turns out the Fifth Circuit withdrew that opinion and substituted another. Not entirely clear why they did that. They could have done ..read more

Today’s blog entry does not have anything to do with people with disabilities per se. However, people with disabilities like anybody else do have the right to express their support or displeasure with public officials. That of course leads to two questions. First, what happens if the website where they can post comments is not accessible to them? We are not covering that point today. The second question is what happens if the public official blocks a person from commenting or deletes certain comments of an individual. It is the second question that was the subject of the Supreme Court decision ..read more

Today’s blog entry is a discussion of the Department of Transportation rule published on March 12, 2024 entitled, “ensuring safe accommodation for air travelers with disabilities using wheelchairs,” here. As usual, the blog entry is divided into categories and they are: the DOT summary of regulatory provisions; and thoughts/takeaways and particular concerns. The blog entry is pretty short, so the reader probably will want to read all of it. I DOT Summary of Regulatory Provisions Table 1—Summary of NPRM Proposals Subject Proposal Safe and Dignified Assistance Clarifies that safe and di ..read more

  Picture of Hockey helmet, puck, and stick (brown and black colors).   Before getting started on the blog entry of the day, Dr. Bob Emmons, a forensic psychiatrist, and I just published a peer-reviewed paper in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons entitled, “The Americans with Disabilities Act and Appropriateness of Referral In Physician Fitness for Duty Evaluation.” The paper, which can be found here, focuses on the ethical and legal obligations of the person doing the fitness for duty evaluation as well as other things. While the paper focuses on the physician, the sam ..read more

Today’s blog entry is one of those situations where I read a case and asked myself whether the court could have gotten to the same place more elegantly than the way it did. The case of the day is Bruno v. Chasity Wells-Armstrong, here, decided by the Seventh Circuit on February 23, 2024. As usual, the blog entry divided into categories and they are: facts; court’s reasoning that failure to accommodate claim fails; court’s reasoning that disparate treatment claim fails; court’s reasoning that retaliation claim fails; and it was entirely possible to get to the same place in a different way/thoug ..read more

Previously, we have blogged on a case involving Julian Vargas and the inaccessibility of kiosk equipment used by Quest diagnostics. It turns out that he is involved in a similar case involving Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings with another plaintiff, Luke Davis. A district Court in California approved a class under the California antidiscrimination law, Unruh Act, as well as a nationwide class under the ADA. Laboratory Corporation appealed. As usual, the blog entry is divided into categories, and they are: facts; court’s reasoning that Vargas had standing; court’s reasoning that the U ..read more

Normally, as you all know, I don’t blog on more than one case in a week. However, I will be out of town the first part of next week, and I generally prefer to get blog entries up at the beginning of the week. I am also headed out of town the following week as well (middle to end of that week). So, I thought I would put up a blog now and also establish a game plan for the blog entries for the next two weeks. Our topic for the day and for our next blog as well is retaliation. There are two cases that we will look at in this blog and in the following blog (we can call it part I and part II). In p ..read more