“A group in Santa Fe says the city is discriminating against them because they say that they’re allergic to the wireless Internet signal. And now they want Wi-Fi banned from public buildings. … [Arthur] Firstenberg and dozens of other electro-sensitive people in Santa Fe claim that putting up Wi-Fi in public places is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The city attorney is now checking to see if putting up Wi-Fi could be considered discrimination. But City Councilor Ron Trujillo says the areas are already saturated with wireless Internet.” (Gadi Schwartz, KOB, May 20).
Posts Tagged ‘disabled rights’
D.C. Circuit panel: paper money unfair to blind
The Washington Post reports, and Hans Bader at CEI’s Open Market discusses the 2-1 panel decision (PDF) upholding a lower court ruling. The case hinged on whether the prospective modifications to currency, which the National Federation of the Blind have criticized as unnecessary, would impose an “undue burden” under the Rehabilitation Act. Judge Randolph, in dissent: “There are approximately 7,000,000 food and beverage vending machines in the United States; by one estimate, it would cost $3.5 billion to retool or replace these machines.” Earlier here. More: Patterico.
ADA litigation closes another Calif. restaurant
Even rural Northern California affords no refuge from the filing mills:
Eureka’s Arctic Circle franchise has closed its doors after the restaurant was sued for noncompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Jack Williams, who has owned the franchise with his wife, Peggy, since 1989, said the couple decided to close the business last Tuesday because they cannot afford the renovations required by the lawsuit.
The suit was filed by local attorney Jason K. Singleton, who in recent years has filed ADA-related suits against a number of local establishments, including Village Pantry, Broadway Cinema, Fortuna Theatre, Cafe Waterfront and College of the Redwoods, among others. …
“Here we had a business that was serving all kinds of customers and now is serving no one,” Hockaday [J Warren Hockaday, executive director of the Greater Eureka Chamber of Commerce] said.
(Ryan Burns, “Arctic Circle closes due to ADA lawsuit”, The Times-Standard, May 6; earlier).
“I felt my son would be at a disadvantage if he did not get the therapy offered”
A mom yields to the pressures in our educatio-legal* system to let her son be given the “disabled” label. “I realized was that among the parents I knew, well over 50 percent had their child in some form of therapy”. (Linda Keenan, Burbia, Apr. 4).
* Yes, it’s a coinage, but since “medico-legal” is by this point an accepted term, it’s probably only a matter of time before “educatio-legal” makes its way too.
May 6 roundup
- Raelyn Campbell briefly captured national spotlight (“Today” show, MSNBC) with $54 million suit against Best Buy for losing laptop, but it’s now been dismissed [Shop Floor; earlier]
- Charmed life of Florida litigators Stanley and Susan Rosenblatt continues as Miami judge awards them $218 million for class action lawsuit they lost [Daily Business Report, Krauss @ PoL; earlier here, here, and here]
- Lerach said kickbacks were “industry practice” and “everybody was paying plaintiffs”. True? Top House GOPer Boehner wants hearings to find out [NAM “Shop Floor”, WSJ law blog]
- It’s Dannimal House! An “office rife with booze, profanity, inappropriate sexual activity, misuse of state vehicles and on-the-job threats involving the Mafia” — must be Ohio AG Marc Dann, of NYT “next Eliot Spitzer” fame [AP/NOLA, Adler @ Volokh, Above the Law, Wood @ PoL; earlier]
- Sorry, Caplin & Drysdale, but you can’t charge full hourly rates for time spent traveling but not working on that asbestos bankruptcy [NLJ] More: Elefant.
- Fire employee after rudely asking if she’s had a face-lift? Not unless you’ve got $1.7 million to spare [Chicago Tribune]
- Daniel Schwartz has more analysis of that Stamford, Ct. disabled-firefighter case (May 1); if you want a fire captain to be able to read quickly at emergency scene, better spell that out explicitly in the job description [Ct Emp Law Blog]
- As expected, star Milberg expert John Torkelsen pleads guilty to perjury arising from lies he told to conceal his contingent compensation arrangements [NLJ; earlier]
- Case of deconstructionist prof who plans to sue her Dartmouth students makes the WSJ [Joseph Rago, op-ed page, Mindles H. Dreck @ TigerHawk; earlier]
- How’d I do, mom? No violation of fair trial for judge’s mother to be one of the jurors [ABA Journal]
- First sell the company’s stock short, then sue it and watch its share price drop. You mean there’s some ethical problem with that? [three years ago on Overlawyered]
Welcome New York Times readers
This website is mentioned in an article on allergies and chemical sensitivities in the workplace, specifically on the case of Susan McBride, who’s suing her employer, the city of Detroit, for not preventing a co-worker from wearing perfume to the office (see Jul. 6 and Jul. 18, 2007; earlier Detroit case, May 25, 2005). (Lisa Belkin, “Sickened by the Office (Really)”, May 1).
Connecticut: timed fireman test violated ADA, cont’d
Updating our Jan. 18, 2007 post: “Connecticut’s Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities says that the city of Stamford violated anti-discrimination law because they wouldn’t give extra time on a promotion exam to David Lenotti. Lenotti is a fire lieutenant with attention deficit disorder.” [Excerpting coverage in the Apr. 15 Stamford Advocate*]:
The city defended the denial by claiming a fire captain, the position Lenotti sought, must be able to read and process information quickly at a fire scene. But state officials said the city never proved that was true, never consulted with disability rights experts and does not use a promotional test that actually measures how fast a candidate can read.
(Dave Statter, Apr. 20; Created Things, Apr. 16; decision in PDF format). More: Daniel Schwartz has more analysis (May 3): if you want a fire captain to be able to read quickly at emergency scene, gotta spell that out explicitly in the job description.
*An odd aspect of the Stamford Advocate article, preserved on GoogleCache: it quotes disability consultant Suzanne Kitchen making the very same comment, word for word, that we criticized her for making more than a year ago. Does Ms. Kitchen really repeat herself so precisely?
After Casey Martin: accommodation demands in sports
Marc Edelman, guest posting at Above the Law (Apr. 24):
For an example of one of the more extreme disability claims, in Badgett v. Alabama High School Athletic Association, 2007 WL 2461928 (N.D. Ala. 2007), the parents of a wheelchair-bound student with cerebral palsy, Mallerie Badgett, brought a claim arguing that wheelchair-bound students should be allowed to compete for team points against able-bodied students running in a track race on foot. According to the complaint, “Miss Badgett [was] concerned that competing in a separate wheelchair division [would] affect her ability to receive college scholarships and other benefits.” The Northern District of Alabama ultimately, and wisely, denied Badgett’s request for a preliminary injunction.
Edelman also discusses the better-known controversy in which the Lausanne-based Court of Arbitration for Sport will consider (presumably not applying U.S. law) the appeal of double-amputee sprinter Oscar Pistorius who will be arguing that his prosthetic legs do not in fact provide an edge over real legs.
Californian vexatious-litigant roundup
It looks as if, barring intervention by the U.S. Supreme Court, serial ADA litigant Jarek Molski and his lawyer Thomas Frankovich, longtime Overlawyered favorites both, won’t be filing any more accessibility lawsuits in California’s populous Central District. The Ninth Circuit’s decision not to disturb an order to that effect by the late Judge Edward Rafeedie, however, came by a surprisingly narrow margin, with nine judges dissenting. Among them, Judge Marsha Berzon said Rafeedie should not have acted unilaterally to bar the two from suing throughout the district, while Alex Kozinski went so far as to maintain that Rafeedie had failed to offer evidence in suggesting “that Molski is a liar and a bit of a thief”. The majority of judges, however — and the Ninth is among the last circuits anyone would accuse of an excessive wish to shut down litigation — disagreed. (Dan Levine, “9th Circuit Judges Blast Order Barring ADA Lawyer”, The Recorder, Apr. 9). One final bit from the account in the Recorder might cause the reader’s jaw to drop open, as it did mine:
Rafeedie died of cancer late last month, but Frankovich still holds a grudge.
“What he did is morally reprehensible,” the attorney said Monday. “Acting morally reprehensible creates bad karma, and sometimes you have to pay the piper for bad karma.”
In other news of vexatious California litigants:
For years, self-described public-interest litigator Burton Wolfe has bragged that he was one of the few people to get off the state’s so-called vexatious litigant list for self-represented plaintiffs who file frivolous lawsuits. Those who are put on the list can file “pro per,” or do-it-yourself, lawsuits only with a judge’s permission. But after enjoying a few years off the blacklist, the 75-year-old Wolfe has sued his way back onto the roster. … [His name was restored to the list after] he sued the San Francisco Food Bank and America’s Second Harvest for setting up what he calls a food “racket” in the privately owned low-income senior-housing Eastern Park Apartments where he lives.
(Lauren Smiley, “Vexatious Litigant Burton Wolfe Fighting Eviction After Threatening More Lawsuits”, San Francisco Weekly, Feb. 20). Perhaps the most celebrated of modern San Francisco’s vexatious litigants is Patricia A. McColm, who has been profiled in a number of news stories including Ken Garcia, “Woman who sues at drop of hat may get hers”, San Francisco Chronicle, June 6, 2000, reprinted at Forensic Psychiatric Associates site. Incidentally, the British court system is thoughtful enough to post its list of vexatious litigants online, an obvious aid to persons who might find themselves the target of threatened suits by persons on the list. But although the California courts have a webpage discussing the fact of their having a list, I could find no sign that they had posted the list itself online. Have any U.S. states (or Canadian provinces, etc.) done so?
Canada: McDonald’s to pay C$55K for firing non-handwashing employee
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has ordered McDonald’s to pay $55,000 for failing to do enough to accommodate an employee whose disabling skin condition prevented her from complying with the restaurant’s hand-washing policy. Among other grounds for its decision, the tribunal cited the following:
There was no evidence of:
* the relationship between food contamination and hand-washing;…
(HRHeroBlogs/Northern Exposure, Apr. 15; Ezra Levant).
More: Commenter Bill Poser finds the decision “much more reasonable” than the reporting makes it sound and says, in particular, Northern Exposure cut off a relevant last word from its quote: “…hand-washing frequency“.