I’ll be co-presenting a talk on Website Accessibility Litigation with Jason Taylor of UsableNet Thursday morning March 24 at the CSUN Accessibility Conference CSUN Conference 2019. We will be covering both the litigation landscape and accessibility solutions to avoid litigation if possible. If you are there, or in the neighborhood, please come by. This is a follow-up to my appearance via photoshop at the Oscars.
I’m going to presenting a webinar on ADA website litigation for the University of Texas School of Law CLE program on Friday the 28th. Here is the registration information:
Live from the UT CLE Studio on September 28, 2018 from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
1.00 hour CLE, $65
Website Accessibility Lawsuits
Lawsuits claiming the ADA requires that websites be accessible to those with disabilities are being filed in record numbers against businesses small and large. This seminar will explain what “accessibility” means for websites, the legal theories behind such suits, the still confused state of the law, and effective strategies for dealing with a claim against your client.
If you cannot watch the entire webcast at its scheduled time, register now and view the recorded eCourse when it is available in “Your Briefcase” after the webcast. Earn CLE credit (in TX and CA) on your time!
This won’t be free, but those of you who are attorneys will receive CLE credit for the course.
Bravo les bleus as our friends from France say. Their convincing victory over Croatia to win the World Cup is not, unfortunately, matched by developments in the world of ADA and FHA litigation, which are as usual a mixed bag.
Remember the Hydra?
Fernando Gastelum, Pl., v. P. Heritage Inn of Chandler LLC, Def.., 2018 WL 3376964 (D. Ariz. July 11, 2018) reminds us that ADA plaintiffs, like the mythical Hydra, can be hard to stop. The Hydra originally had nine heads, but grew two new heads for every one that was cut off. Mr. Gastelum, who suffered a reversal recently when a federal judge dismissed eleven cases as once* survived a Motion to Dismiss that argued, in essence, his eleven earlier defeats should be sufficient to defeat his new lawsuit. The Court disagreed, noting that a lawsuit against a different defendant and different hotel was subject to the same rules concerning the presumed truth of the complaint no matter how many times similar complaints had been dismissed. Another reminder that only Congress can solve the serial litigation problem. More
We have recently had a large influx of fake subscribers from countries that are not usually interested in disability law – places that aren’t really interested in law of any kind. We don’t have any reason to think the website was hacked or our subscriber list taken, but if you get an email Accessibility Defense or accessdefense.com other than our usual notices of a new blog post please let us know by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org.
Thanks, Richard & Jeanne.
Obvious but often overlooked – it takes more than an impairment to be disabled under the ADA (or FHA)
By Richard Hunt in Accessibility Litigation Trends, ADA, ADA FHA General, ADA FHA Litigation General, ADA regulations, Definition of disability, FHA definition of handicap, Uncategorized Tags: ADA, Alcoholism, disability, FHA, Major life activity
The March 13 decision in Johnson v. NYS Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse, 1:16-cv-9769 (S.D.N.Y. March 13, 2018) shouldn’t be particularly interesting. The plaintiff claimed to be disabled because he was a recovering alcoholic. The Court dismissed the complaint because the plaintiff did not allege that his alcoholism interfered with a major life activity, explaining:
Although alcoholism is considered an ” impairment” under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act , “more than a physical or mental impairment is required ” to satisfy the definition of “disability. ” Because ” [m]ere status as an alcohol or substance abuser does not necessarily imply a limitation under the anti-discrimination statutes, a plaintiff who alleges that he is disabled “must demonstrate not only that he . . . was actually addicted to drugs or alcohol in the past, but also that this addiction substantially limits one or more of his . . . major life activities. ” (quoting an earlier case). More