Appellate court clarifies ADA restroom measurements

[mark handler]

Appellate court clarifies ADA restroom measurements

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=27797

SAN FRANCISCO

February 19, 2015 10:48am

Complying with specifications set by the Americans with Disabilities Act can be confounding for a small business, but now the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has helped with the measurements. At least for bathrooms.

In a ruling published Thursday, the San Francisco court says the retailer Bed, Bath and Beyond of California LLC did not violate ADA requirements with the dimensions for the bathroom doors in its store in Riverside.

Chris Kohler, a paraplegic, had sued, saying the store’s restroom’s door did not provide adequate maneuvering room for his wheelchair.

The ruling:

• Affirms the district court’s conclusion that the ADA does not require wall space within the maneuvering clearance next to the frame of a restroom door that must be pulled open, and,

• Affirms the district court’s ruling that, because the door lacked a “latch” within the meaning of standards governing ADA compliance, no maneuvering space was required next to the frame of a restroom door that must be pushed open.

“It would be hard to overstate the significance of the ADA for a person with a disability who could enjoy a public facility with reasonable modification to make it accessible, but who is otherwise precluded from use and shut out by an architectural barrier,” notes the appellate court’s decision.

Download the decision here

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/links/12-56727.pdf

 

[JPohling]

That was an easy one.............cant believe it even went to court.

 

[mark handler]

As you know the court's basic function is to resolve disputes by determining the facts and applying legal principles to decide who is right.

Right now people are looking for any infraction to gain money. I'm glad the store fought rather than settle

 

[conarb]

As you know the court's basic function is to resolve disputes by determining the facts and applying legal principles to decide who is right.

Not true, all appellate courts reviews only laws and the proper application thereof, the facts are completely the province of the lower courts which hear witnesses and evidence, appellate courts never hear witnesses and see evidence. There are very rare occasions wherein appellate courts take a case de novo where they do *hear* and *see* witnesses and apply the laws to the facts. Where this is done is in appeals of small claims court cases, if the losing party to a small claim appeals to the superior court the superior court takes the case de novo and all witnesses and evidence are reheard and all evidence from the small claims case is disregarded.

If the appellate court determines that factual issues are affected by their rulings on the law they state their objections to the trial court's determination of the law and refer the case back to the trial court for a new hearing.

 

[JPohling]

The crazy thing is, the strike side clearance requirements are very well defined to me. But when you start to read thru the decision you realize that attorneys can make anything very convoluted. what a game

 

[mark handler]

The crazy thing is, the strike side clearance requirements are very well defined to me. But when you start to read thru the decision you realize that attorneys can make anything very convoluted. what a game

I Might point out, That court case might have taken a different turn in state court.

 

[JPohling]

Thats the scary part!

 

[conarb]

The crazy thing is, the strike side clearance requirements are very well defined to me. But when you start to read thru the decision you realize that attorneys can make anything very convoluted. what a game

It's not a game it's just the way laws are, I'll tell you a story from back when I was in law school. During our constitutional law midterm we were in a tiered classroom and the professor was walking through the rows passing out the tests, as he progressed students who had received the exams started gasping looking bewildered, a couple of girls actually started crying. He turned around and asked: "What's wrong?" One girl blurted: "This isn't fair!" There was one question on the test that had nothing to do with anything we had read or studied, he stated: "It's not fair because the law isn't fair, laws aren't right or wrong, they have nothing to do with fairness or rightness or wrongness, they are written and passed by legislators who write laws proposed by pressure groups, commercial interests, environmentalists, any interests with enough money to make campaign donations to him. It's your job to deal with this, now write me a good exam, remember the curve requires that I flunk one third of you but this is only a midterm and counts for 25% of your grade so even if you flunk this exam you can redeem yourselves on they final.

We all saw codes bought by the fire sprinkler industry here at the Minneapolis hearing, we even have members of this forum who took bribes from the sprinkler industry to vote the code requirement in so we all know that codes are bought and paid for.

 

[MtnArch]

This reminds me of an Urban Design professor I had at Cal Poly SLO - at the first class meeting/lecture he want through a litany of things, including that if you were used to getting an "A", you'd be lucky to get a "B"; if you were used to getting a "B" you'd be luck to get a "C" ,etc. What he opined is that if you want an "A" you have to be exceptional and your ideas truly original. I received a "C" in the class, but I LEARNED **so** much from that professor! I never felt like I was marked down for any reason - I felt that the grade I received was what I had EARNED through my work, though I wish I could have received one of the higher grades!