Before getting started on the blog entry of the week, an update/supplemental information on a couple of prior cases that we have discussed previously. First, EEOC v. William Beaumont Hospital, which we discussed here, resulted in a consent decree. The hospital has to pay the plaintiff $30,000 in noneconomic and compensatory damages. Also, within
Won the Game But Lost the Right Tackle: EEOC v. Walmart Stores East, L.P.
Our blog entry of the day reminds me of the situation where a team wins the football game but loses a key player in the process. I thought of that when reading EEOC v. Walmart Stores East, L.P., here, decided by the Seventh Circuit on August 27, 2024. As usual, the blog entry is
Inaccessible Kiosks Can Cost You Big Time
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,
What Do You Have to Show to Get Compensatory Damages Under the Rehabilitation Act Redux
In going through my cases in my blog pipeline, I decided to blog on the case of Basta v. Novant Health Inc. It was decided on December 27, 2022, and it is a published decision from the Fourth Circuit. It is a case concerning the effective communication obligations of hospitals to their patients and to
Applicability of ADA’s Title II Primary Consideration Rule for Effective Communication to title III of the ADA, the ACA, and to §504
Before getting started on the blog entry of the week, I want to wish the members of the Jewish faith celebrating Yom Kippur this week a pleasant fast if you are fasting’s as well as a pleasant end to the 10 days of reflection.
Also, I wanted to report that my case against LawPracticeCLE
Another Arrow in the Quiver for Plaintiff Attorneys When it Comes to Effective Communication Claims
I would say about 10% of my blog entries deal with ADA related nondiscrimination laws and concepts but not the ADA itself, including such things as the Fair Housing Act, Air Carrier Access Act, and constitutional law. Occasionally, we throw in a state law as well. Today is another one of those, the, Affordable Care
To Boldly Go Where No One Has Before: The 11th Circuit’s Opinion in Gil v. Winn-Dixie
Before getting started on the blog entry of the week, I want to congratulate the Stanford Cardinal and the Baylor Bears for winning the women’s and men’s NCAA Division I basketball titles.
It is interesting how my decision on to what to blog on works from week to week. Sometimes I have a
Nexus, Doe, or 42 USC §12181(7): When Must an Internet Site be Accessible to Persons with Disabilities?
Today’s blog entry comes from the Fourth Appellate District of the State of California. It is an Internet accessibility case. The difference with this case is that there is a focus on the California’s Civil Rights Act, what they call the Unruh Civil Rights Act. The facts are pretty straightforward. The plaintiff is permanently
Braille Gift Cards and Title III
It is hard to write on anything that doesn’t have something to do with Covid-19. However, ADA jurisprudence continues and a lot of it happens outside of Covid-19. That said, expect a tremendous amount of issues stemming from Covid-19. We will certainly be following those issues closely. Today, we will be talking about a
Domino’s Cert. Denial and What Does it Mean?
Before getting started on the blog of the week, a couple of housekeeping matters are in order. First, I am delighted that you have decided to visit my blog on my birthday (October 8). For trivia nuts, it is also the anniversary of the great Chicago fire.