The United States Department of Justice Department of Justice SealF The United States Department of Justice
Search The Site
 

Appellate Briefs and Opinions Banner

Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

  • Young v. UPS (S. Ct.) – Amicus
    • A majority of the courts of appeals (including the Fourth Circuit here) have erred in construing the PDA because the statute's prohibition on sex discrimination requires that pregnant employees be "treated the same" for "all employment-related purposes" as other persons who are similar "in their ability or inability to work"
    • Review by the Court is not warranted at this time because Congress's enactment of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 may lead courts to reconsider their approach in evaluating claims similar to petitioner's, and the EEOC is currently considering adopting new enforcement guidance on pregnancy discrimination that would clarify its interpretation of various issues related to pregnancy under the PDA and the ADA

    Document Date 
    Certiorari granted, 2014 WL 2931839 07/01/14
    Brief as Amicus in Response to Court's Invitation 05/19/14
  • Sciarrillo v. Christie (3d Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court correctly dismissed plaintiffs' Title II and Section 504 claims because the plaintiffs do not have a right to contest transfer and the closure of the two state institutions under Title II, Section 504, or Olmstead

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus 05/12/14
  • M.H. v. Cook (11th Cir.) – Amicus
    • A serious risk of institutionalization states a claim under the ADA

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus 04/23/14
  • Association for Disabled Americans, Inc. v. Reinfeld Anderson Family Limited Prt (11th Cir.) – Amicus
    • Doctors are not exempt from claims under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act
    • Both Acts prohibit disability discrimination by health care providers, and discharging a patient because the patient sued for access is the definition of retaliation

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus 04/22/14
  • Rawdin v. American Board of Pediatrics (3d Cir.) – Amicus
    • A "sensory skill" includes physical, cognitive, and neurological disabilities that impair an individual's ability to process what he sees, reads, or hears
    • Testing accommodation claims should be analyzed under the "best ensure" standard of Section 309's implementing regulation (28 C.F.R. 36.309(b)(1)(i)), rather than under the more lenient "reasonableness" standard found in other provisions of the ADA

     
    Document Date 
    Supplemental Letter Brief as Amicus 08/11/14
    Brief as Amicus 03/17/14
  • Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (10th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The store design violates Title III because the porch entrance is so integral to the customer experience that the defendants must make it accessible, notwithstanding that Title III's regulations do not always require every store entrance to be accessible
    • Plaintiffs have standing to sue even if they went to the store at least in part to be testers
    • The district court properly ordered the defendants to remedy the violation without balancing their costs against the benefits to the plaintiffs

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus 02/10/14
  • Disabled in Action v. Board of Elections in the City of New York (2d Cir.) – Amicus
    • The injunctive relief ordered in this case was proper and unremarkable as a remedy to a systematic civil rights violation
    • Provisions of New York law permitting individuals with disabilities to apply for absentee ballots or alternative polling places are not adequate substitutes for accessible primary polling places
    • Plaintiffs were not required to identify individuals actually unable to vote to succeed on their disability discrimination claims
    • After giving the Board of Elections repeated opportunities to comment on the plaintiffs' proposed remedies and submit an alternative of its own, the district court properly entered injunctive relief without waiting longer for the City to submit a plan

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 752 F.3d 189 05/14/14
    Supplemental Letter Brief 01/14/14
    Brief as Amicus 08/14/13
  • Leon v. United States Department of Justice (D.C. Cir.) – Respondent
    • Leon's petition for review should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because he does not have the right to judicial review of the Disability Rights Section's discretionary decision under either the ADA or the Administrative Procedure Act

     
    Document Date 
    Dismissed 11/12/13
    Motion to Dismiss 05/01/13
  • Kreisler v. Second Avenue Diner (2d Cir.) – Amicus
    • Under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12181 et seq., a plaintiff with a disability who personally encounters a barrier at the entrance to a restaurant that currently deters him from visiting the facility has standing and is entitled to seek injunctive relief as to all the restaurant's barriers that pertain to his disability

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 731 F.3d 184 09/25/13
    Brief as Amicus 04/25/13
  • Lance v. Kyer (5th Cir.) – Amicus
    • A school district that is deliberately indifferent to student-on-student disability-based harassment is liable for damages
    • The evidence in this case is sufficient for the plaintiffs to survive summary judgment
    • There is sufficient evidence that the harassment Montana suffered was based on his disabilities, that it was sufficiently severe and pervasive to be actionable, and that school officials had sufficient knowledge of this harassment to trigger their obligation to act

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 743 F.3d 982 02/28/14
    Brief as Amicus 03/18/13
  • Gilmore v. Mississippi Coast Coliseum Commission (S.D. Miss.) – Intervenor
    • Plaintiff has sufficiently pleaded a Section 504 claim
    • The court does not need to decide the Title II constitutional question now; in any event, Title II validly abrogates Eleventh Amendment immunity in this context

     
    Document Date 
    District Court Order, 2013 WL 1194706 03/22/13
    Brief as Intervenor 02/01/13
  • Fortyune v. City of Lomita (9th Cir.) – Amicus
    • Title II requires that a city, when it provides on-street parking, provide some on-street parking reasonably accessible to, and usable by, individuals with disabilities, even though no current ADA regulation directly addresses this obligation

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus 01/29/13
  • Gaylor v. Georgia Department of Natural Resources (N.D. Ga.) – Intervenor/Amicus
    • Title II properly abrogates state sovereign immunity where it ensures accessible public facilities
    • The requirements of Title II and Section 504 are enforceable in a suit for injunctive relief pursuant to the Ex Parte Young doctrine
    • Regulations authoritatively construing Title II and Section 504 are enforceable under those statutes' private rights of action

     
    Document Date 
    District Court Order , 2013 WL 4790158 09/06/13
    Brief as Intervenor and Amicus 11/13/12
  • Long v. Murray County School District (11th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court did not adequately consider Eleventh Circuit precedent and persuasive authority, holding that a school district may be deliberately indifferent to harassment when it knows that its remedial measures have been ineffective and fails to take any further action reasonably calculated to eliminate the harassment

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 522 F. App'x 576 06/18/13
    Brief as Amicus 09/28/12
  • Johnson v. Neiman (8th Cir.) – Intervenor
    • The appellate court should consider whether Johnson's Title II claim fails for the same evidentiary reasons as his Eighth Amendment claim, in which case the court need not reach the constitutional question
    • Title II validly abrogates sovereign immunity in the prison context

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 504 F. App'x 543 05/06/13
    Brief as Intervenor 07/23/12
  • Paulone v. City of Frederick (D. Md.) – Intervenor
    • In the context of policing, pretrial detention, and parole supervision, Title II is valid legislation pursuant to Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment and so can abrogate sovereign immunity

     
    Document Date 
    District Court Order 06/04/12
    Reply Brief 05/25/12
    Brief as Intervenor 04/23/12
  • Benjamin v. Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (3d Cir.) – Amicus
    • Properly understood, Olmstead establishes community placement as the default for people for whom community placement is appropriate but who cannot express a preference either for or against community placement
    • The class certified in this case meets the requirements of Rule 23

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 701 F.3d 938 12/12/12
    Brief as Amicus 04/05/12
  • McBay v. City of Decatur (N.D. Ala.) – Intervenor/Amicus
    • Plaintiffs have adequately pleaded violations of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
    • Title II is valid Section 5 legislation to the extent that it ensures accessible public facilities
    • Title II is valid Commerce Clause legislation
    • Justice Department regulations are enforceable under Title II's authoritatively construing Title II private right of action
    • Title II regulates only current economic activity and that National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), therefore has no application here

     
    Document Date 
    District Court Decision, 2014 WL 1513344 04/11/14
    Response to Supplemental Authority 09/27/12
    Brief as Intervenor and Amicus 01/27/12
  • Argenyi v. Creighton University (8th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court erred in holding that to establish a violation under the statutes, Argenyi needed to show that he would be effectively excluded from the medical school without the assistance of the auxiliary aids and services he requested
    • The district court erred in disregarding Argenyi's statements concerning the effectiveness of the auxiliary aids Creighton provided, and deferring to Creighton's decision not to allow Argenyi to use interpreters in clinics as an "academic" decision

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 703 F.3d 441 01/15/13
    Brief as Amicus 01/26/12
  • Jones v. National Conference of Bar Examiners (2d Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court correctly concluded that under Section 309 of Title III, which expressly addresses professional examinations, and its implementing regulation, the examination must be administered so as to "best ensure" that the exam measures the applicant's achievement or aptitude, rather than reflect the individual's disability
    • The district court correctly rejected defendant's argument that, notwithstanding the plain language of the regulation, a "reasonable accommodation" standard applies
    • The term "reasonable" is not used in Section 309 or the regulation, but is contained in a separate provision of Title III, and the more generalized reasonableness standard does not override the more specific regulatory guidance directed at testing

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Order, 476 F. App'x 957 04/26/12
    Brief as Amicus 11/17/11
  • Pacific Shores Properties, LLC, et al. v. City of Newport Beach and Newport Coast Recovery LLC, et al. v. City of Newport Beach (9th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court erred in requiring plaintiffs to show that they were treated differently than similarly situated individuals who do not have disabilities to prove intentional discrimination based on disability
    • The district court misconstrued plaintiffs' intentional discrimination claims and applied an erroneous standard in determining whether plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to raise genuine issues of material fact for trial concerning the City's discriminatory intent

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 730 F.3d 1142 09/20/13
    Brief as Amicus 10/11/11
  • Ault v. Walt Disney World (11th Cir.) – Amicus
    • DOJ's regulation is a reasonable interpretation of a public accommodation's obligation under Title III
    • The district court erred in not deferring to DOJ's regulation
    • Disney failed to establish a legitimate safety defense to support its Segway ban

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 692 F.3d 1212 08/30/12
    Brief as Amicus 09/19/11
  • Mary Jo C. v. New York State and Local Retirement System (2d Cir.) – Amicus/Intervenor
    • Title II's abrogation of sovereign immunity is valid as applied to the class of cases involving the receipt of public benefits
    • A state law that precludes a public entity from making a reasonable accommodation is preempted

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 707 F.3d 144 01/30/13
    Supplemental Brief as Intervenor 01/11/12
    Brief as Amicus and Intervenor 08/29/11
  • Baughman v. Walt Disney World (9th Cir.) – Amicus
    • Disney challenged the validity of DOJ's newly issued regulation that creates a rebuttable presumption that a place of public accommodation must permit Segways and other classes of personal, power-driven mobility devices unless the public accommodation establishes that permitting such devices create a legitimate safety risk or would require a fundamental alteration
    • DOJ's regulation is a valid and reasonable interpretation of a public accommodation's obligation under Title III
    • The presence of an alternative device does not defeat an individual's claim that his mobility device of choice is necessary, and that the court should defer to DOJ's regulation and DOJ's interpretation of what constitutes a reasonable and necessary modification

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 685 F.3d 1131 07/18/12
    Brief as Amicus 08/15/11
  • Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC (S. Ct.) – Respondent
    • None of the constitutional provisions from which a ministerial exception may derive - the Free Exercise Clause, the Establishment Clause and the freedom of association - precludes the application of the anti-retaliation provisions of the ADA in this case

     
    Document Date 
    Supreme Court Decision, reported at 132 S. Ct. 694 01/11/12
    Brief for the Federal Respondent 08/02/11
  • Mason, et al. v. City of Huntsville (N.D. Ala.) – Intervenor/Amicus
    • Title II is constitutional legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause
    • Regulations implementing Title II are enforceable in a private suit
    • Provision of sidewalks and streets is a "service"
    • Plaintiffs did not fail to state a Section 504 claim
    • Title II regulates only current economic activity and that National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), therefore has no application here

     
    Document Date 
    District Court Decision, 2012 WL 4815518 10/10/12
    Response to Supplemental Authority 09/27/12
    Brief as Intervenor and Amicus 06/10/11
  • R.K. v. Board of Education of Scott County, et al. (6th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court applied the wrong legal standard and that state regulations governing insulin administration are preempted by federal protections for students with disabilities

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 494 F. App'x 589 08/16/12
    Brief as Amicus 06/07/11
  • American Nurses Association, et al. v. O'Connell (Cal. S. Ct.) – Amicus
    • As applied to the state court settlement of a federal case brought by Intervenor American Diabetes Association, state law is preempted because it imposes an obstacle to compliance with the IDEA, Title II, or Section 504

     
    Document Date 
    State Court Decision, 304 P.3d 1038 08/12/13
    Brief as Amicus 05/11/11
  • Zied-Campbell v. Richman (3d Cir.) – Intervenor
    • The district court erred in reaching the Eleventh Amendment issue, and its ruling on that issue therefore should be vacated
    • In the alternative, if the court of appeals reaches the merits of the Eleventh Amendment issue, it should reverse the ruling of the district court and hold that the abrogation of Eleventh Amendment immunity is valid in the context of social services

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 428 F. App'x 224 05/24/11
    Brief as Intervenor 02/10/11
  • Kilroy v. Maine (1st Cir.) – Intervenor
    • The court of appeals certified to the Attorney General that the case involved a constitutional challenge to a federal statute, and the Division therefore intervened to address the Eleventh Amendment issue on appeal

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision (unpublished) 03/08/11
    Brief as Intervenor 10/13/10
  • Armstrong v. Schwarzenegger (9th Cir.) – Amicus
    • Title II of the ADA's statutory language fully authorizes the regulation that states that a public entity is responsible for ensuring that its contractors comply with the ADA

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 622 F.3d 1058 09/07/10
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 01/13/10
  • McCollum v. Owensboro Community and Technical College (W.D. Ky.) – Intervenor
    • The ADA’s retaliation ban helps to enforce Title II, which itself is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation that abrogates sovereign immunity
    • The retaliation ban also enforces the First Amendment rights of public employees, and so is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation regardless of the validity of the underlying ADA rights

     
    Document Date 
    Decision, 2010 WL 5393852 12/22/10
    Reply Brief as Intervenor 09/14/10
    Brief as Intervenor 08/17/10
  • Goodman v. Donald (S.D. Ga.) – Intervenor
    • The ADA’s bar on retaliation validly abrogates the State’s sovereign immunity

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor 07/27/10
  • Miller v. Donald (S.D. Ga.) – Intervenor
    • The ADA’s bar on retaliation validly abrogates the State’s sovereign immunity
    • The Division also filed as an amicus curiae arguing that the Title II right of action extends to challenges based on the implementing regulations

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor 07/21/10
  • Johnson v. Board of Trustees of Boundary County School District No. 101 & Don Bartling (9th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The district court’s decision was erroneous because (1) it contravenes the plain meaning and intent of the ADA and the EEOC’s interpretive guidance; and (2) based on this record, the court should have found that the school district had a duty to provide the teacher with a reasonable accommodation

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 666 F.3d 561 12/08/11
    Brief as Amicus 07/28/10
  • Cota v. Maxwell-Jolly (9th Cir.) –Amicus
    • Institutionalization is not a prerequisite for establishing a violation of the integration mandate
    • Plaintiffs are at serious risk of being institutionalized

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus 06/28/10
  • William Long, et al. v. Holly Benson, et al. (11th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Requirements in the regulations under Title II of the ADA are enforceable through the private right of action to enforce the statute
    • Regulation stating that entities are not required to provide “personal devices and services” to individuals with disabilities does not exempt entities from complying with the integration regulation when they choose to operate a program that does provide personal services and devices to individuals with disabilities

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 383 F. App'x 930 (unpublished) 06/22/10
    Brief as Amicus Curiae [PDF] 04/02/09
  • American Ass'n of People with Disabilities v. Holland (11th Cir.) –Amicus
    • The panel or the full court should reconsider this holding, because the panel misconstrued Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001), as precluding private lawsuits to enforce any regulatory requirements not spelled out in statutory language
    • Sandoval permits private enforcement of regulations that authoritatively construe statutes that themselves confer private rights of action
    • 28 C.F.R. 35.151 is just such an authoritative interpretation of Title II

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 647 F.3d 1093 07/27/11
    Brief as Amicus in support of plaintiffs' petition for rehearing by the panel or en banc 06/11/10
  • Brockman v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, et al. (5th Cir.) – Intervenor
    • The Division intervened in this appeal to defend the constitutionality of the ADA provision abrogating states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 397 F. App'x 18 (unpublished) 09/30/10
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] (Note: brief was submitted for review but technically not accepted by the court) 03/29/10
  • Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc. (9th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The fact that an individual with a disability has visited the place of public accommodation, i.e., was not deterred from doing so, should not prevent him from showing that he has standing

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 631 F.3d 939 01/07/11
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 03/05/10
  • Oster v. Wagner (9th Cir.) –Amicus
    • Institutionalization is not a prerequisite for asserting an integration claim

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Order, 504 F. App'x 555 01/07/13
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 03/02/10
  • Baker v. Windsor Republic Doors (6th Cir.) – Amicus
    • The ADA and 42 U.S.C. 1981a permit the compensatory damage award for a retaliation claim brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12203

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, 414 F. App'x 764 (unpublished) 03/08/11
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 12/21/09
  • Arizona v. Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc. (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Closed captions and video descriptions are auxiliary aids that permit individuals with sensory disabilities to enjoy a movie theater’s service within the limitations of their disabilities
    • These auxiliary aids do not alter a movie theater’s service of exhibiting movies
    • There is nothing in the ADA’s text, legislative history, or regulations that indicates that closed captioning is not required

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 603 F.3d 666 04/30/10
    Amicus Brief [PDF] 02/06/09
  • Zibbell v. Granholm (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • The Division intervened in this appeal to defend the constitutionality of the ADA provision abrogating states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], 313 F. App'x 843 (unpublished) 02/23/09
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 09/03/08
  • Germano v. International Profit Ass'n (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Statements made by a party and relayed through a communications assistant are not hearsay and are admissible as statements by a party-opponent under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(C) and (D)
    • Treating relayed statements as hearsay is contrary to the purposes of the ADA, and impedes the government’s enforcement of federal statutes that bar discrimination against persons with disabilities

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 544 F.3d 798 09/12/08
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 02/21/08
  • Goodman v. Donald (S.D. Ga.) -- Intervenor
    • This court should avoid deciding the constitutionality of Title II of the ADA
    • Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 11/09/07
  • Miller v. Johnson (E.D. Va.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 10/25/07
  • United States & Spencer v. Earley (4th Cir) -- Intervenor-Appellant
    • The district court erred in reaching the question of Title II’s constitutionality
    • The district court erred in dismissing Spencer’s claims on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity
    • This court should avoid deciding a new constitutional question
    • Should this court reach the question, it should hold that Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA, as applied in the prison context

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellant [PDF] 11/02/07
    Reply Brief [PDF] 12/14/07
    Court of Appeals Decision , 278 F. App'x 254 05/16/08
  • Haas v. Quest Recovery Services (6th Cir) -- Intervenor
    • In light of this Court’s holding that plaintiffs have not stated valid Title II claims against the State, this Court’s subsequent conclusion that the State is immune to plaintiffs’ Title II claims is in contravention of the Supreme Court’s instructions in Georgia and should not be reinstated

     
    Document Date 
    Letter Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 04/18/07
    Court of Appeals Decision on Remand, 247 F. App'x 670 (unpublished) 08/24/07
  • Miller v. California Speedway Corp (9th Cir) -- Amicus
    • The Department of Justice’s ADA regulations require assembly areas to provide wheelchair seating areas with lines of sight over standing spectators where patrons can be expected to stand during events

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 04/05/07
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF] reported at 536 F.3d 1020 08/08/08
  • Disabled in Action of Pennsylvania v. SEPTA (3d Cir) -- Amicus
    • The district court’s holding conflicts with the statutory language
    • The district court’s interpretation could have negative, unintended consequences by discouraging informal resolution of disputes and unnecessarily increasing litigation
    • The district court improperly used the “discovery rule” to accelerate the running of the statute of limitations on DIA’s claims
    • Under appropriate circumstances, a plaintiff can seek injunctive relief to prevent an anticipated violation of Section 12147(a) before the alterations are completed; the availability of such relief does not accelerate the running of the statute of limitations

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF] 08/19/08
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 03/28/07
  • Chase v. Baskerville (E.D. Va.) -- Intervenor
    • This court should not reach the validity of Title II's abrogation
    • Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to prison administration
    • As the Fourth Circuit has held, state agencies validly waive their Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 when they accept federal financial assistance

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 01/19/07
    District Court Decision (unpublished), 508 F. Supp. 2d 492 08/02/07
  • Welch v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University (W.D. Va.) -- Intervenor
    • The Fourth Circuit has already held that Title II validly abrogates States’ immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA in the context of public higher education
    • The Fourth Circuit has also held that a state agency validly waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 when it accepts federal financial assistance

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 01/19/07
  • United States v. AMC Entertainment, Inc. (9th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion in entering the remedial decree
    • All remaining arguments in AMC’s opening brief have been waived and, in any event, are meritless

     
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 549 F.3d 760 12/05/08
    Brief as Appellee [PDF] 09/08/06
  • Buchanan v. Maine (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • This court should not reach the constitutionality of Title II unless necessary
    • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of the provision of mental health services

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 08/30/06
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 469 F.3d 158 11/16/06
  • George v. BART (N.D. Cal.) -- Intervenor
    • DOT's regulations satisfy the ADA and are not arbitrary and capricious

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 08/24/06
    District Court Decision 03/20/07
  • Disability Rights Council v. WMATA (D.D.C.) -- Intervenor
    • This court should not reach this issue
    • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the context of public transportation

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 07/17/06
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 239 F.R.D. 9 12/09/06
  • Prye v. Blunt (W.D. Mo.) -- Intervenor
    • This court should not reach the constitutionality of Title II unless necessary
    • Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to voting

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 06/15/06
  • Jones v. Gale (8th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • This court has held that private plaintiffs may enforce the requirements of Title II of the ADA through Ex Parte Young suits

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 05/25/06
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 470 F.3d 1261 12/13/06
  • Spencer v. Earley (E.D. Va.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to prison administration
    • As the Fourth Circuit has held, state agencies validly waive their Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 when they accept federal financial assistance

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 04/14/06
    District Court Decision 01/30/07
  • Wisconsin Community Services, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Does 28 C.F.R. 35.130(b)(7) or 28 C.F.R. 41.53 apply to disputes about zoning in suits under the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
    • Do 28 C.F.R. 35.130(b)(7) and 28 C.F.R. 41.53, if applicable to zoning disputes, create an entitlement to accomodation in the absence of intentional discrimination or disparate impact?
    • If the answer to Questions 1 and 2 is yes, are the regulations valid?

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus on Rehearing En Banc [PDF] 11/23/05
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 465 F.3d 737 09/26/06
  • Randolph v. Texas Rehabilitation Commission (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • This en banc court has held that a state agency waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act when it accepts federal financial assistance

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 10/11/05
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF] (unpublished), available at 214 Fed. Appx. 424 01/18/07
  • Toledo v. Sanchez-Rivera (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public education

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 08/25/05
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 454 F.3d 24 07/06/06
  • Roe v. Johnson (2d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • This Court should not rule on the constitutionality of Title II without first considering alternative grounds for affirming or reversing
    • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public licensing programs

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 03/14/05
  • Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason University (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • This court should decide first whether plaintiff stated a claim prior to entertaining the university's constitutional challenges
    • Congress validly conditioned federal funding on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
    • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public education
    • The ADA retaliation provision is also valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation
    • The Eleventh Amendment is no bar to private suits against state officials in their official capacities to enjoin future violations of Title II and Section 504

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 12/08/04
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 411 F.3d 474 06/13/05
  • Bill M. v. Nebraska Department of Health & Human Services (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • The district court properly declined to rule on the State's Eleventh Amendment challenge at this stage in the proceedings
    • Congress validly abrogated the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA in the institutionalization context
    • The panel incorrectly concluded that this court's 1999 holding in Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle controls the outcome of this case

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 11/26/04
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 408 F.3d 1096 05/27/05
    Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor [PDF] 07/08/05
  • George v. BART (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Congress left a gap in Title II for DOT to fill
    • DOT's regulations reasonably interpret the accessibility requirements of the ADA

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus Curiae [PDF] 10/06/04
    Court of Appeals Decision (unpublished), available at 175 Fed. Appx. 809 03/29/06
  • Boswell v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc. (10th Cir.) -- Amicus Curiae
    • An air carrier may choose not to provide passengers with medical oxygen without showing that providing it would be an undue hardship or fundamental alteration
    • The Air Carrier Access Act of 1986 does not create a private cause of action

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus[PDF] 11/24/03
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 361 F.3d 1263 03/16/04
  • Barbour v. WMATA (D.C. Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 10/26/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [HTML], reported at 374 F.3d 1161 07/09/04
  • United States v. Hoyts Cinemas Corp. (1st Cir.) -- Appellee/Cross-Appelant
    • The district court correctly granted summary judgment to the United States on the proper interpretation of Standard 4.33.3
    • The district court properly denied defendants' motions for summary judgment
    • The district court erred in holding that Standard 4.33.3 could only be applied to theaters constructed or refurbished after the United States filed suit
    • The district court's declaratory judgment should be vacated and remanded

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee/Cross-Appellant [PDF] 10/02/03
    Reply Brief as Cross-Appellant [PDF] 11/18/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 380 F.3d 558 08/20/04
  • Espinoza v. Texas Department of Public Safety (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress clearly conditioned receipt of federal financial assistance on a state agency's knowing and voluntary waiver of sovereign immunity to private actions under Section 504
    • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
    • The Department's waiver of sovereign immunity was effective

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 04/22/03
    Supplemental Letter Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 04/12/05
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unpublished, 148 Fed. Appx. 224 08/25/05
  • Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd. (5th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Title III of the ADA applies to foreign-flagged cruise ships doing business in the United States
    • The district court erred in dismissing the barrier removal claims because of the absence of standards for new construction and alterations as to cruise ships

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus[PDF] 04/03/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 356 F.3d 641 01/12/04
  • Meyers v. Texas (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Suits under Title II may be brought against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief
    • This Court need not, and should not, consider the State's challenges to the validity of the surcharge regulation in this appeal
    • The surcharge regulation does not exceed the scope of the Attorney General's delegated regulatory authority
    • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation
    • Title II is valid Commerce Clause legislation as applied to this case
    • Title II does not violate the Tenth Amendment

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 03/20/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 410 F.3d 236 05/19/05
  • Lieberman v. Delaware (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly conditioned a State's receipt of federal funding on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 02/27/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unpublished, 70 Fed. Appx. 630 07/14/03
  • Pugliese v. Dillenberg (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly conditioned the receipt of federal financial assistance on the waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
    • The State was not unconstitutionally coerced into waiving its sovereign immunity to Section 504 claims

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 02/03/03
    Reply Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 05/16/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 346 F.3d 937 10/07/03
  • Thomas v. University of Houston (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress clearly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
    • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
    • The University's waiver of sovereign immunity was effective

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 01/29/03
    Supplemental Letter Brief [PDF] 04/22/05
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unpublished, 155 Fed. Appx. 115 11/04/05
  • Danny R. v. Spring Branch Independent School District (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress clearly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
    • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
    • The TEA's authority to solicit and accept federal funds conditioned on a waiver of sovereign immunity is sufficient, as a matter of federal law, to support a waiver of immunity through acceptance of federal funds

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 12/10/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unpublished, 124 Fed. Appx. 289 03/30/05
  • Radaszewski v. Garner (8th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Eleventh Amendment is no nar to rivate suits against state officials to enjoin future violations of federal law
    • Congress did not display any intent to foreclose jurisdiction under Ex parte Young for suits under Title II And Section 504

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus[PDF] 11/29/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 383 F.3d 599 09/08/04
  • Meineker v. Hoyts Cinemas Corporation (2d Cir.) -- Amicus
    • District court erred in concluding, on a motion for summary judgment, that defendant’s stadium-style movie theaters provide patrons in wheelchairs “lines of sight comparable to those for members of the general public,” as required by Standard 4.33.3
    • District court erred in concluding that the wheelchair spaces in defendant’s stadium-style movie theaters are an “integral” part of the fixed seating plan, as required by Standard 4.33.3, even though in 14 of the 18 theaters, defendant provides no wheelchair seating in the stadium sections where the vast majority of the public sits.

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus[PDF] 11/27/02
    Reply Brief [PDF] 01/03/03
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unpublished, 69 Fed. Appx. 19 07/01/03
  • A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 and IDEA suits

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 10/24/02
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 341 F.3d 234 08/19/03
  • Miranda B., et al. v. John Kitzhabeer, Governor of the State of Oregon, etc. (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Defendants' arguments about the validity of the Federal Statutory provisions regarding regarding their Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit under Title II and Section 504 are foreclosed by binding circuit precedent
    • Suits under Title II and Section 504 may be brought against state officials in their official capacities for prospetive relief

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor[PDF] 07/23/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 328 F.3d 1181 05/14/03
  • M.A. & United States v. State-Operated School District of the City of Newark and New Jersey Department of Education, etc. (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor/Appellee
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor-Appellee [PDF] 07/03/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 344 F.3d 335 09/16/03
  • Doe v. State of Nebraska (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 07/02/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 345 F.3d 593 10/07/03
  • Bowers v. NCAA (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits
    • This court should not reach the constitutionality of Title II unless necessary
    • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public education

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 06/28/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 346 F.3d 402 08/20/03
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 08/15/06
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 475 F.3d 524 02/01/07
  • Biggs v. Board of Education of Cecile County, Maryland (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 06/14/02
    Reply Brief [PDF] 08/15/02
    Appeal dismissed 01/17/03
  • Henrietta D. v. Giuliani (2d Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act may be enforced against state officials for prospective relief

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amics [PDF] 05/29/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 331 F.3d 261 06/09/03
  • Wilson v. Pennsylvania State Police Dep't (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits
    • Title I of the ADA may be enforced against state officials for prospective relief

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 04/23/02
    Reply Brief [PDF] 06/07/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unreported, 2002 WL 31492373 11/07/02
  • United States v. Cinemark (6th Cir.) -- Appellant
    • ADA regulations require theaters to provide individuals in wheelchairs with a view comparable to that provided other patrons, not just an unobstructed view of the screen

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellant [PDF] 03/18/02
    Reply Brief [PDF] 03/18/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 348 F.3d 569 11/06/03
  • Wessel v. Glendening (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Title II of the ADA may be enforced by injunction against state officials

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 02/26/02
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 306 F.3d 203 09/26/02
  • Patrick W. v. Anderson (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
    • Section 504 may be enforced by injunction against state officials

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 01/11/02
    Appeal dismissed 03/06/03
  • Chisolm v. McManimon (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 11/02/01
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 275 F.3d 315 12/28/01
  • Thomas v. Nakatani (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions
    • Title II of the ADA may be enforced by injunction against state officials

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [PDF] 10/28/01
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 309 F.3d 1203 11/06/02
  • Lovell v. Chandler (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 07/09/01
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 303 F.3d 1039 09/05/02
  • Vinson v. Thomas (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 06/12/01
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF] , reported at 288 F.3d 1145 05/03/02
  • United States v. Law School Admissions Council (3d Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Unsuccessful law school applicant properly denied intervention into case brought by United States to enforce ADA in admissions testing
    • Unsuccessful law school applicant properly denied intervention may not appeal from judgment in underlying case

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee 1st Appeal [PDF] 11/02/01
    Brief as Appellee 2d Appeal [PDF] 06/24/01
    Court of Appeals Decision, unreported, 48 Fed. Appx. 41 08/27/02
  • Oregon Paralyzed Veterans of America v. Regal Cinemas (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • ADA regulations require movie theater with stadium-style seating to provide spaces for wheelchair users in places that provide comparable lines of sight to that provided to other customers

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [PDF] 10/19/01
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 339 F.3d 1126 08/13/03
  • McAleese v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corrections (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions
    • Title II and Section 504 may be enforced against statute officials through injunctive relief even if Congress did not validly remove States' sovereign immunity

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 05/02/01
    Court of Appeals decision, unpublished, 275 F.3d 36 (Table) 08/27/01
  • Simmons v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 08/08/01
    Court of Appeals decision, unpublished, 34 Fed. Appx. 152 (Table) 03/21/02
  • Root v. Georgia State Bd. of Veterinary Medicine (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions

     
    Document Date
    Petition for Rehearing [HTML] [PDF] 04/26/01
    Petition for Rehearing denied 05/17/01
  • Rendon v.Valleycrest Productions (11th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Title III of the ADA applies to the process a television game show uses for screening contestants, even though the screening process takes place over the telephone and not in the show's physical studios

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML] [PDF] 04/23/01
    Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 294 F.3d 1279 06/18/02
  • Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Sciences Center (2d Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 04/13/01
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 280 F.3d 98 09/25/01
    Petition for Rehearing En Banc [PDF] 11/16/01
    Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied 02/06/02
  • Robinson v. Kansas (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VI and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 02/05/01
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 295 F.3d 1183 07/09/02
  • Schrader v. Dr. Fred A. Ray, P.C. (10th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act applies to employers with fewer than 15 employees that accept federal financial assistance
    • Any person subjected to discrimination by a recipient of federal financial assistance may bring suit under Section 504, not just intended beneficiaries of the assistance

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 01/18/01
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 296 F.3d 968 07/16/02
  • Kapche v. City of San Antonio (5th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Whether individuals with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus present a significant safety risk while driving requires an individualized inquiry and cannot be decided as a matter of law

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 11/14/00
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 304 F.3d 493 08/30/02
  • Asbury v. Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to IDEA and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 11/07/00
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], unpublished, 9 Fed. Appx. 558 04/18/01
  • Williams v. Hermanson Family Limited Partnership (10th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination under Title III of ADA if he demonstrates that barrier removal is generally readily achievable in the circumstances of the case by suggesting a reasonable method to remove the challenged barrier
    • Defendant has the ultimate burden of proving that barrier removal is not readily achievable

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 10/17/00
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 264 F.3d 999 08/29/01
  • Duncan v. WMATA (D.C. Cir.) -- Amicus
    • For unskilled workers, a person whose impairment prevents him from performing medium or heavy lifting is significantly restricted in his ability to perform a class of jobs and is thus a person with a disability
    • There is no basis for requiring a plaintiff to establish by expert testimony and statistical evidence the number and types of jobs for which he is disqualified in the relevant geographical area

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 08/02/00
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 240 F.3d 1110 03/02/01
  • Hooks v. OKBridge, Inc. (5th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Title III of ADA applies to services of a place of public accommodation offered over the internet
    • Private club exception to Title III is narrow

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 06/30/00
    Court of Appeals decision, unpublished 08/21/00
  • Cisneros v. Wilson (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title I of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
    • May enforce Title I against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 05/25/00
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 226 F.3d 1113 09/11/00
  • Webb v. Clyde L. Choate Mental Health and Developmental Center (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • May enforce Title I against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 05/12/00
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 230 F. 3d 991 10/25/00
  • McGarry v. Director, Department of Revenue (8th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • May enforce Title II against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 04/19/00
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 281 F.3d 776 02/27/02
    Petition for Rehearing Denied 08/02/04
  • Walker v. Snyder (7th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Suits against state officials in their individual capacities not barred by the Eleventh Amendment
    • May enforce Title II against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)
    • Title II of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title II actions

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 12/27/99
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 213 F.3d 344 05/16/00
    Petition for Certiorari [HTML]  [PDF] 10/10/00
    Petition for Certiorari denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1190 02/26/01
  • Olinger v. United States Golf Association (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Golf courses, including the playing area of a course "inside the ropes," are places of public accommodation under Title III

     
    Document Date 
    Proposed Brief as Amicus [HTML] [PDF], not accepted for filing by Court of Appeals 12/20/99
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 205 F.3d 1001 03/07/00
    Court of Appeals decision vacated and remanded, reported at 532 U.S. 1064  06/04/01
  • Lonberg v. Sanborn Theaters (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • An architect who designs an inaccessible facility but does not participate in its construction can be liable under § 303 of the ADA
    • Parties responsible for complying with § 303 of the ADA are not limited to owners, lessors, lessees, and operators of places of public accommodation, but also includes architects and contractors

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 10/25/99
    Proposed Reply Brief [HTML], not accepted for filing by Court of Appeals 12/17/99
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 259 F.3d 1029 08/06/01
  • Pomeroy v. Western Michigan University (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title I of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title I and Section 504 actions

     
    Document Date
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 10/12/99
    Court of Appeals decision, unpublished 02/28/01
  • Schaefer v. The State Insurance Fund (2d Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Persons with Diabetes Mellitus will often meet the definition of disability under the ADA, even when they take medication to control its effects
    • Many persons with Diabetes may be "Regarded As" having, or have a record of, a substantially limiting impairment

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 10/04/99
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 207 F.3d 139 03/22/00
  • Johnson v. Tennessee Technical Center at Memphis (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Title II of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title II and Section 504 actions
    • Denying accessibility to courthouses and colleges implicates constitutional rights

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 04/07/99
    Appeal dismissed by stipulation 07/12/99
  • Chabner v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co. (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Title III guarantees more than mere physical access to places of public accommodation
    • Title III applies to the terms and conditions of insurance coverage
    • McCarran-Ferguson Act does not preclude plaintiffs from using Title III to challenge the terms and conditions of insurance policies

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 03/31/99
    Court of Appeals decision [PDF], reported at 225 F.3d 1042 09/11/00
  • Doe v. Mutual Of Omaha Insurance Co. (7th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Title III applies to the terms and conditions of insurance coverage
    • Placing a lower cap on benefits for AIDS-related conditions, as opposed to other illnesses, is disability-based discrimination within the plain language of the ADA
    • McCarran-Ferguson Act does not preclude plaintiffs from using Title III to challenge the terms and conditions of insurance policies

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML] 02/16/99
    Court of Appeals decision, reported at 179 F.3d 557 06/02/99
    Petition for Certiorari denied, reported at 528 U.S. 1106 01/10/00
  • Onishea v. Hopper (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor
    • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
    • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
    • May enforce Section 504 against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)
    • Section 504 was intended to protect HIV-positive persons

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Intervenor [HTML] [PDF] 10/07/98
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 171 F.3d 1289  04/07/99
    Oppositionto Petition for Certiorari [HTML]  [PDF] 12/21/99
    Petition for Certiorari denied, reported at 528 U.S. 1114 01/18/00
  • Martin v. PGA Tour, Inc. (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
    • Golf courses, including the playing area of a course "inside the ropes," are places of public accommodation under Title III
    • Rules of athletic competitions are not categorically excluded from examination under the ADA, whether characterized as "substantive" or otherwise
    • Requiring golf tournament to modify rule to permit golfer with a disability to use a cart instead of walking would not, under the facts of this case, constitute a fundamental alteration

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Amicus [HTML]  [PDF] 08/18/98
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 204 F.3d 994 03/06/00
    Petition for Certiorari Granted, reported at 530 U.S. 1306 09/26/00
    Supreme Court Brief as Amicus [HTML] 12/13/00
    Supreme Court decision [HTML], reported at 532 U.S. 661 05/29/01
  • United States v. City and County of Denver (10th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Duty of employer to reassign qualified employees who can no longer perform the functions of current assignment
    • Availability of compensatory damages under Title II
    • Futility exception to general requirement of interactive process
    • Title II applies to employment discrimination

     
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF] 03/06/98
    Supplemental Brief [HTML] [PDF] 07/22/99
    Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 194 F.3d 1116 10/25/99


Browse Briefs by Category

Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Criminal
Education
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex, and Religion)
Equal Access to Justice Act
Equal Credit Opportunity Act
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Housing
Immigration
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Institutionalized Persons
Police Misconduct (Civil Cases)
Religion Cases
Servicemember Cases
Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Voting
Other
General Information Appellate Section
 
Leadership
Diana K. Flynn
Chief
Contact
Appellate Section
(202) 514-2195
FAX - (202) 514-8490
Email:
General Appellate Contact:
crt.appellate@usdoj.gov

Amicus curiae suggestions may be submitted to crt.amicus@usdoj.gov. Submissions should include case name, docket number, circuit/district court name, a brief description of the case and issue, and the current status if known.

Stay Connected YouTube MySpace Twitter Facebook Sign Up for E-Mail Updates Subscribe to News Feeds