“Good Lord, people are complaining because they can’t see a taco, get a life”

by Walter Olson on July 29, 2010

Much reaction in the comments at the San Francisco Chronicle to the Ninth Circuit’s “Chipotle Experience discriminates against the disabled” ruling. Earlier here. And Ted at PoL notes this significant passage rejected by the appeals court:

The [district] court found that Antoninetti had failed to show irreparable injury because he had not revisited either restaurant after Chipotle adopted its written policy and because his “purported desire to return to the [r]estaurants is neither concrete nor sincere or supported by the facts.” It also stated that Antoninetti’s “history as a plaintiff in accessibility litigation supports this Court’s finding that his purported desire to return to the [r]estaurants is not sincere. Since immigrating to the United States in 1991, Plaintiff has sued over twenty business entities for alleged accessibility violations, and, in all (but one) of those cases, he never returned to the establishment he sued after settling the case and obtaining a cash payment.”

More on ADA filing mills here. And I’ve now got a longer post up at Cato at Liberty comparing the policy problem of serial ADA complaints to that of patent trollery, mass filing of “citizen suits”, and the business model of recently formed copyright-holder RightHaven. More: Carl Horowitz, NLPC.

{ 3 trackbacks }

ADA’s anniversary, cont’d
07.29.10 at 9:11 pm
Ross Douthat, “Did The Americans With Disabilities Act Work?”
07.31.10 at 5:01 am
More Evidence That Something Is Deeply Wrong With Me… | Popehat
08.03.10 at 2:28 pm

{ 4 comments }

1 Jack Wilson 07.29.10 at 9:25 am

Has a challenge to ADA ever made it to the Supreme Court? The notion that the federal government can dictate the design of privately owned buildings strikes me as blatantly unconstitutional.

2 Richard Nieporent 07.29.10 at 10:25 am

Has a challenge to ADA ever made it to the Supreme Court? The notion that the federal government can dictate the design of privately owned buildings strikes me as blatantly unconstitutional.

Unfortunately yes. The Supreme Court then proceeded to change the rule of golf.

Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, Casey Martin, a disabled professional golfer will be able to use a golf cart in PGA Tour Inc. tournaments.

http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/litigation/1111501-1.html

3 Aaron Worthing 07.29.10 at 1:43 pm

You guys know by now i defend alot of these ADA claims. I would say however that this does seem to go a bit too far.

Of course i don’t eat there anyway because it gives me the squirts, but that is another matter.

4 Ps 07.29.10 at 10:31 pm

It’s imaginable that a consequence of ADA abuse could be society treating the disabled with contempt.

Comments on this entry are closed.