I am very regular about posting blog entries for the week. I have rarely missed doing that over the 14 years I have been doing this. I do have a good explanation for missing last week. My father died a week ago today, and I was away for funeral events. By any objective measure he
Interactive Process is a Continuing Obligation and Just What is an Adverse Action
(Decision immediately above in adobe format for this week’s blog entry)
Gavina v. Amazon.com-Word version
(word version of case immediately above)
I hope everyone is having a great holiday season. The way it looks for me is I believe I’m going to get two blog entries up this week and then
Interactive Process, Retaliation, and Interference in Title III
I hope everyone that celebrated had a good new year season. Wishing all of those a happy new year. In other news, early election voting is underway in many states. My family voted yesterday. Be sure to vote for the candidate of your choice.
Today’s blog entry returns to a long-standing interest of mine.
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,
Gateway is Everything in California
Before getting started on our blog entry for the week, a couple of housekeeping matters are in order. First, my daughter is off to college a week from Friday. Things are very exciting and terrifying here at the same time. Accordingly, next week is going to be crazy and the week after that even more
Ask for a Remand to State Court Early in Litigation and not Later
Happy new year everyone! Today’s blog entry deals with the question of what happens when a state passes all kinds of laws to cut down on serial plaintiffs who then flood the federal courts, which do not have the same restrictions, with similar cases. The case of the day is Arroyo v. Rosas, here.
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.
Just When is a Modification or Accommodation Necessary Under Title III?
Today’s blog entry comes from the 11th Circuit. It involves severely autistic individuals suing Walt Disney Parks and Resorts over their system of accommodating individuals, particularly when it comes to the severely autistic. The case is A.L. v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc., which can be found here. The decision
Air carrier access act: only one place to go
In a previous blog entry, the Air Carrier Access Act was discussed in terms of whether it allowed for a private cause of action where an airline violated the regulations that carry out that act. However, that blog entry did not answer two questions. First, assuming a private cause of action for violation of that
LSAT and Title III discrimination
Anybody that wants to go to law school must take the LSAT, law school admission test sponsored by the law school admission Council (LSAC) . The LSAT is a standardized test consisting of 100 multiple-choice questions ( Binno v. American Bar Association, 2012 WL 4513617, *1 (E.D. Mich. September 30, 2012)), divided into five