mark handler
SAWHORSE
What Are ‘Drive-by’ ADA Lawsuits?
http://www.care2.com/causes/what-are-drive-by-ada-lawsuits.html
A recent 60 Minutes segment anchored by Anderson Cooper revived a canard that’s painfully familiar to members of the disability community: the menace of “drive-by ADA lawsuits.”
In the segment, viewers learned about disabled people and lawyers who cruise around looking for obvious Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, violations and sue innocent businesses that may not even be aware that they’re violating the law.
The story made it sound like people file these “nuisance lawsuits” for profit, but some disabled people felt it didn’t tell the whole story.
Disability rights lawyers also raised concerns about how the issue was portrayed, noting that some people attempt to negotiate accessibility-related cases before taking them to court. The truth of how and why lawsuits related to the ADA happen is complicated, and the wild ride starts in 1990.
In that year, President George H.W. Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act into law. The groundbreaking legislation had immense scope, with the aim to increase participation in society by disabled people and address discriminatory practices.
The ADA set forth a number of civil rights protections, including barring discrimination in housing and employment. It also created a broad set of general accessibility standards for the built environment to ensure that wheelchair users, cane users and others with mobility impairments can get around more easily.
Imagine not being able to enter courthouses, polling places, post offices or government buildings. Consider never knowing if you could access public pools, grocery stores, restaurants or libraries.
Prior to the ADA, accessibility depended on state and local codes, as well as the kindness of a building owner’s heart. After the ADA, people were required to make structures fully accessible.
There’s a catch, though: The only way to enforce the ADA is with a lawsuit. 26 suits later, inaccessibility is still a widespread problem — even in disability rights strongholds like Berkeley, Ca.
While disabled people can and do reach out with requests in person, over the phone and via letter, officials and business owners don’t necessarily listen — or care. Some aren’t aware of their ADA responsibilities and others don’t want to take action to address them.
They also may not be aware of their ADA rights, like the allowances for business owners who can prove that an accessibility modification would pose an undue burden for them. If, for example, a small business would need to complete thousands of dollars worth of work to modify their building, they’d likely be protected under the undue burden clause.
When people don’t listen, disabled individuals are left with the next option: filing a lawsuit.
Sometimes, they go through the Department of Justice, which has been particularly assertive about ADA-related issues under the Obama Administration. The DOJ, however, only sues when a case is large, complex and likely to set a precedent.
Disabled people who simply want to be able to buy groceries, or to make their communities as a whole more accessible, may be forced to sue to get people to pay attention.
There is some evidence in certain areas that not all of these lawsuits are purely in the public interest, but it’s not as simple as declaring that most ADA-related lawsuits are frivolous or should be prevented.
Colorado lawmaker Ken Buck is proposing state legislation that would act like a fix-it ticket approach for accessibility, requiring businesses to make a good faith effort to fix an issue in response to a demand letter before people could file lawsuits.
Buck argues this will prevent “drive-by” lawsuits while allowing people to enforce their ADA rights. That said, some disabled people fear it may be used to suppress accessibility complaints — particularly since it requires people to discuss the circumstances in which they were denied service.
Complaining about a lack of a curb cut or another outdoor accessibility issue could lead some to argue that a plaintiff was driving around fishing for lawsuit material.
So this one partially passes the sniff test: Yes, people sue over ADA violations. There’s evidence to support the fact that some people and/or law firms do specialize in rounding up minor ADA infractions in the hopes of netting attorney fees — the ADA does not allow people to sue for compensatory damages.
However, other suits are entirely justified. As a whole, they’re a reminder of a serious problem: Decades after the ADA passed, inaccessibility is a big enough problem that it’s possible for people to file thousands of lawsuits across the U.S. every year for demonstrable violations of the law.
http://www.care2.com/causes/what-are-drive-by-ada-lawsuits.html
A recent 60 Minutes segment anchored by Anderson Cooper revived a canard that’s painfully familiar to members of the disability community: the menace of “drive-by ADA lawsuits.”
In the segment, viewers learned about disabled people and lawyers who cruise around looking for obvious Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, violations and sue innocent businesses that may not even be aware that they’re violating the law.
The story made it sound like people file these “nuisance lawsuits” for profit, but some disabled people felt it didn’t tell the whole story.
Disability rights lawyers also raised concerns about how the issue was portrayed, noting that some people attempt to negotiate accessibility-related cases before taking them to court. The truth of how and why lawsuits related to the ADA happen is complicated, and the wild ride starts in 1990.
In that year, President George H.W. Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act into law. The groundbreaking legislation had immense scope, with the aim to increase participation in society by disabled people and address discriminatory practices.
The ADA set forth a number of civil rights protections, including barring discrimination in housing and employment. It also created a broad set of general accessibility standards for the built environment to ensure that wheelchair users, cane users and others with mobility impairments can get around more easily.
Imagine not being able to enter courthouses, polling places, post offices or government buildings. Consider never knowing if you could access public pools, grocery stores, restaurants or libraries.
Prior to the ADA, accessibility depended on state and local codes, as well as the kindness of a building owner’s heart. After the ADA, people were required to make structures fully accessible.
There’s a catch, though: The only way to enforce the ADA is with a lawsuit. 26 suits later, inaccessibility is still a widespread problem — even in disability rights strongholds like Berkeley, Ca.
While disabled people can and do reach out with requests in person, over the phone and via letter, officials and business owners don’t necessarily listen — or care. Some aren’t aware of their ADA responsibilities and others don’t want to take action to address them.
They also may not be aware of their ADA rights, like the allowances for business owners who can prove that an accessibility modification would pose an undue burden for them. If, for example, a small business would need to complete thousands of dollars worth of work to modify their building, they’d likely be protected under the undue burden clause.
When people don’t listen, disabled individuals are left with the next option: filing a lawsuit.
Sometimes, they go through the Department of Justice, which has been particularly assertive about ADA-related issues under the Obama Administration. The DOJ, however, only sues when a case is large, complex and likely to set a precedent.
Disabled people who simply want to be able to buy groceries, or to make their communities as a whole more accessible, may be forced to sue to get people to pay attention.
There is some evidence in certain areas that not all of these lawsuits are purely in the public interest, but it’s not as simple as declaring that most ADA-related lawsuits are frivolous or should be prevented.
Colorado lawmaker Ken Buck is proposing state legislation that would act like a fix-it ticket approach for accessibility, requiring businesses to make a good faith effort to fix an issue in response to a demand letter before people could file lawsuits.
Buck argues this will prevent “drive-by” lawsuits while allowing people to enforce their ADA rights. That said, some disabled people fear it may be used to suppress accessibility complaints — particularly since it requires people to discuss the circumstances in which they were denied service.
Complaining about a lack of a curb cut or another outdoor accessibility issue could lead some to argue that a plaintiff was driving around fishing for lawsuit material.
So this one partially passes the sniff test: Yes, people sue over ADA violations. There’s evidence to support the fact that some people and/or law firms do specialize in rounding up minor ADA infractions in the hopes of netting attorney fees — the ADA does not allow people to sue for compensatory damages.
However, other suits are entirely justified. As a whole, they’re a reminder of a serious problem: Decades after the ADA passed, inaccessibility is a big enough problem that it’s possible for people to file thousands of lawsuits across the U.S. every year for demonstrable violations of the law.
