XL Center to Pay Damages in Disability Lawsuit

[mark handler]

XL Center to Pay Damages in Disability Lawsuit

By SAMEEA KAMAL, skamal@courant.com

The Hartford Courant

5:15 p.m. EDT, July 2, 2013

XL Center to Pay Damages in Disability Lawsuit - Courant.com

The XL Center has modified interior doors so they take less force to open, lowered vending machines so they are easier to reach, altered bathroom fixtures, and lowered baby-changing stations to help settle a complaint that the building was not fully accessible to patrons with disabilities, the U.S. Attorney's Office announced Tuesday.

The settlement, for a case filed by patron Michelle Duprey against the XL Center and its operators, will also cover $20,000 in legal expenses, and $3,000 to Duprey for nonphysical damages paid by Connecticut Innovations, which leases some of the space.

Duprey's complaint, filed in the spring of 2009 after she attended a Bruce Springsteen concert at the venue, alleged that the center failed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act because it did not provide seating to patrons in wheelchairs that have an accessible line of sight, inadequate restroom facilities, and did not allow online ticket purchasing for disability seating at the same time as regular ticket purchases. Duprey uses a wheelchair.

The complaint — which also names the center's management companies, the city of Hartford, the University of Connecticut and the State of Connecticut as defendants — prompted an investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office in 2011.

In response to the investigation, the facility's owners and operators. including Connecticut Innovations, AEG and Northland, modified the facilities and, as part of the settlement, agreed to make further improvements.

Some of the modifications made include adjustments to interior doors so that no more than five pounds of force is required to open them, improved signage to indicate accessible passageways and lowered vending machines, along with the removal of any objects protruding into pathways.

Restrooms were modified to add automatic faucets and flushes to all restrooms for disabled patrons and those with automatic faucets were modified to remain running for at least 10 seconds. Piping underneath each restroom was covered and baby-changing stations were lowered to the required height in all restrooms.

A visual alarm system and an assisted listening system have also been installed, in addition to policy changes in ticket purchases and required concession staff training.

Gary Phelan, attorney for Duprey, said the case was a positive first step in a partnership between the XL Center and the disability community.

Attempts to reach a lawyer at the law firm of Shipman and Goodwin, which represented the XL Center, were unsuccessful.

In a written statement, acting U.S. Attorney Deirdre Daly said: "The law appropriately mandates that all people including those with disabilities have equal access to places of public accommodation. As the XL Center serves so many, we hope the Center's significant efforts will act as a reminder to all businesses of their legal obligations under the ADA to the citizens of Connecticut."

The downtown Hartford arena seats more than 16,000 people for its various athletic and entertainment events.

The Americans with Disabilities Act, passed in 1990, prohibits discrimination and ensures equal opportunity for persons with disabilities in employment, services and public accommodation.

Copyright © 2013, The Hartford Courant

 

[jar546]

So, if this story was written by a California paper, would they put a "reform" twist on it for litigation?

 

[steveray]

Maybe my designer from the other thread worked down there.......was it at least 20% accessible?....

 

[peach]

This is exactly why the courts should only be awarding damages to the plaintiff, if the defendant REFUSES to make accommodations.

ADA should not be a reason for people to get rich; it's to make accommodations for the disabled.

We enforce the building code (appendix E if adopted), and ANSI A117; the burden of ADA is on the owner of the property.

There are dozens of "non accessible" existing buildings out there; Code officials are NOT insensitive to the needs of the disabled, but the building official can't be the "whipping boy" all the time.. the ADA is civil rights, not construction legislation. It's the responsibility of the owner to make modifications.

 

[mark handler]

XL Center settles lawsuit over access for disabled

Updated 8:54 am, Wednesday, July 3, 2013

XL Center settles lawsuit over access for disabled - SFGate

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Hartford's XL Center has agreed to improve access for disabled patrons after a federal investigation into a complaint that the 16,000-seat arena was not complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Under terms of a settlement announce Tuesday by acting Connecticut U.S. Attorney Deirdre Daly, the arena's management will add accessible bathrooms and seats, remove mobility impairments, install additional safety measures and change some of its policies.

"As the XL Center serves so many, we hope the center's significant efforts will act as a reminder to all businesses of their legal obligations under the ADA to the citizens of Connecticut," Daly said in a statement. "Even facilities that were built prior to the 1992 enactment of the ADA are legally required to remove all physical barriers to access so that their facilities can be enjoyed fully and equally by all people, including those that have limited mobility."

The initial complaint was brought by New Haven lawyer Michelle Duprey, an advocate for the disabled, after she attended a 2009 Bruce Springsteen concert. She said she found several problems, including her view from the arena's wheelchair seating area, which she says was obstructed.

Daly said the XL Center, city and state officials cooperated in addressing the complaint. She said federal authorities will monitor the arena for three years to ensure compliance.

 

[mark handler]

ADA Attorney's Complaint Rocks XL Center

By Michelle Golladay All Articles

The Connecticut Law Tribune

July 3, 2013

In 2009, New Haven lawyer Michelle M. Duprey went to see and hear Bruce Springsteen perfom at Hartford's XL Center. She heard the iconic rocker just fine. But she didn't see much of The Boss's legendary energetic show.

Her frustration led her to file complaints against the concert and sports arena — action that resulted in a settlement last week that should help Connecticut's disabled sports and music fans in the future.

Duprey, who is the director of New Haven's Department of Services for Persons with Disabilities, is a wheelchair user herself. At the XL Center, she was directed to the seating area for people with disabilities. That area is directly behind — but not very much above — the banks of seats where normal patrons sit, adjacent to the walkway that wraps around the arena.

As usual, Springsteen played for about three hours. "I was quite disappointed I didn't get to see much of it," Duprey said. Her view was completely obstructed, as other able-bodied rock fans stood during the entire concert.

"It's the first time that's ever happened to me. I've been to see [university of Connecticut] basketball games, where people stand up for a couple of minutes and then sit down," said Duprey. "At this concert, I spent most of the time looking at the back of two young guys in front of me."

At one point, she scooted her wheelchair over to the top of an aisle, so she could look directly at the stage. But, Duprey said, "arena employees told me to move because I was causing a fire hazard."

The sight lines weren't the only issue. Duprey and a good friend who went with her — another wheelchair user — said restrooms and concession stands were also largely inaccessible to disabled people. "They had 39 bathrooms and not one was compliant," Duprey said. "At the time I'm thinking something has to be done—this is not right and other people know it's not right."

'Start Doing Something'

For the XL Center, this was definitely not the right concert-goer to upset.

Duprey's job in New Haven is to monitor compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other disability-related laws. She recalls that one year prior to the concert, U.S. Justice Department attorneys visited her New Haven office. She said they commented on how Connecticut was "not so good on wheelchair accessibility" and that "people need to start doing something."

Fast-forward to a month-and-a-half after the Springsteen concert. Duprey sent letters to both the Justice Department and the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities about the XL Center, which is owned by the city of Hartford and leased to a mangement company.

"I tried to do this in a way that wasn't litigious because when I contacted the state, I hoped there would be a way to work out some sort of resolution," she said. "And it's not that they were oppositional, but they basically said this needed to be taken to a different level."

Duprey set out to collect more evidence. She brought a video camera to the 2010 "Senior Night" UConn basketball game at the XL Center and taped her still-obstructed view from the disabled seating section. She posted the video on YouTube. She sent a follow-up letter to the Justice Department, including a link to the online video. "I got a call from the U.S. Attorney's Office a couple of weeks later saying, 'OK, we're doing an investigation,'" said Duprey.

At that point, Duprey reached out to Gary E. Phelan, a principal at Bridgeport law firm Cohen and Wolf whose practice includes employment and disability discrimination. The Justice Department brought in consultants to look at the building. The major question from the start, according to both Duprey and Phelan, was: "How can we solve this problem?"

"The objective of all parties involved was to work together, to reach a resolution, and that's what we did," said Phelan.

Under the terms of the settlement announced last week by acting Connecticut U.S. Attorney Deirdre M. Daly, the XL Center's management will, among other things, add handicapped-accessible bathrooms and create an unobstructed viewing area for disabled people.

"There were certainly a lot of ADA accommodations to be addressed along the way," said Phelan. "It's not just the traditional payment of some amount of money. We're talking about structural changes and a large facility that was built [in 1976] well before the ADA was passed [in 1990]."

He continued: "Those tend to be hard cases to negotiate and they take time. Added to that was that there were multiple players involved here who have input—UConn has investment into the XL Center, the Department of Justice, the City of Hartford, the building's management company. There's a lot of different agendas involved here."

Duprey said she hasn't yet seen the renovations, but does know that the XL Center has already begun the process.

"I'll have to wait until my next UConn [game] or Springsteen concert," she said with a laugh, "But really, any improvement is better. Is it going to be perfect in my mind? No. Is it a step in the right direction? Yes. In any legal proceeding, you compromise on things."

Duprey, who has been with the New Haven Department of Services for Persons with Disabilities for 15 years, hopes that others in the disabled community uses her case as motivation to take action when they are inconvenienced by a lack of accommodation. "We all encounter people in wheelchairs every day," she said. "In reality, Connecticut is aging and when people age, there's a higher number of [people with handicaps]. There's an exponential increase."

Read more: ADA Attorney's Complaint Rocks XL Center

 

[peach]

heck, I'm short.. I've been to concerts/events when I can't see over the people standing up in front of me... can I sue them? Can I sue the president because I couldn't stand in the front row during the inaguration parade?

There really, actually, really.. needs to be a limit. Except for front row disabled seating (which there will be some.. but it will cost the same as regular front row seating), chances are every other accessible seat (and most regular seating) is going to be obstructed when people stand up.

 

[mark handler]

There really, actually, really.. needs to be a limit.

Yes BUT

Many/most of the cases that have "big" payouts are projects that have been built or altered AFTER ADA became law.

It is a total disregard of the law.

 

[jar546]

This is exactly why the courts should only be awarding damages to the plaintiff, if the defendant REFUSES to make accommodations.ADA should not be a reason for people to get rich; it's to make accommodations for the disabled.

We enforce the building code (appendix E if adopted), and ANSI A117; the burden of ADA is on the owner of the property.

There are dozens of "non accessible" existing buildings out there; Code officials are NOT insensitive to the needs of the disabled, but the building official can't be the "whipping boy" all the time.. the ADA is civil rights, not construction legislation. It's the responsibility of the owner to make modifications.

I believe that without other damages being awarded, there is no incentive for compliance where no state ADA laws exist. It is sort of like getting caught without a permit and the only thing you have to do is get a permit to keep out of trouble. It is worth the risk since there is no penalty. They gamble, knowing the odds are in their favor for not getting caught. If they know there are penalties for getting caught, such as doubled permit fees, fines or in the case of ADA violations, having to pay compensatory damages in addition to fixing for compliance, they may think twice.