Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

ADA and disabled rights roundup

  • If you think reopening a retail business with new distancing rules is a challenge, wait till you see the interplay with the ADA, as I explain in my new post at Cato;
  • Court dismisses class action against Wendy’s on behalf of disabled persons unable to use after-hours drive-up service as a walk-up [Davis v. Wendy’s International, a pre-pandemic case; earlier here, here, and here on ADA complaints regarding drive up windows]
  • “Why is subway accessibility so expensive? It’s not just about installing new elevators.” [Annie McDonough, City and State NY]
  • “After DOJ Letter on Website Compliance, The ADA Guessing Game Continues” [John D. McMickle, WLF] ADA filing mills hit condo and co-op boards [Frank Lovece, Habitat] Serial plaintiff files web access suit against Vermont bicycle maker [Bicycle Retailer]
  • Limousine service to pay $30,000 for refusing to hire deaf driver [EEOC press release]
  • Colorado homeowner’s association told to pay $50,000 after failing to allow woman to stay in the complex with her emotional support dog [Associated Press] “Do We Have to Allow Dogs in Our Workplace? Maybe. Maybe Not.” [Daniel Schwartz] Trucking company will pay $22,500 after asking driver to pay fee to bring service dog along in truck to help with his anxiety [EEOC press release]

Filed under: , , , ,

4 Comments

  • Using a drive through as a walk up is simply not safe. The business would be liable for a death. Same with a deaf driver. Sorry but no one who is deaf should drive. They can’t hear other cars or sirens. The law is being pedantic about the ADA and business and common sense are suffering.

    • By cc

    • Using a drive through as a walk up is simply not safe.

      Why?

      Are drivers so blinded by the thought of a hot taco or burger they can’t see a person standing in the middle of the lane?

      I agree that the theory that someone would attempt to hold the restaurant liable for an injury, but that doesn’t make that action right.

      If a person were crossing a street and were struck by a car, or even if protesters are blocking traffic and a car pushes them, we generally don’t hold the state or the police accountable for that. We hold the pedestrian and driver accountable for their actions.

      I happen to ride a bike and have been told that I can not use a drive through. Motorcycles / scooters / mopeds can use a drive through, but I cannot. Even though I am under the same laws of the road as motorized vehicles and have to follow those same laws, I can’t get in a line at a drive through?

      Where’s the “common sense” in that?

      • I agree with gitarcarver about pedestrian and bicyclist access to drive-through-only food service, and would be inclined to deny a license to a drive-through place that did not offer such access. But the drive-through needs statutory immunity for any lawsuits from pedestrian and bicyclist injury in a drive-through lane.

    • I’m also wondering how a deaf driver is to communicate with clients.