Appellate Section - Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

Briefs and Opinions

• Group Home on Gibson Island v. Gibson Island Corp. (4th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court misapplied the legal standards for determining whether plaintiffs satisfied their burden to show that their requested accommodation was necessary and reasonable
  • The district court erred in concluding that GIC did not refuse plaintiffs’ accommodation request
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	03/26/24

• Tudor v. Whitehall Central School District (2d Cir.) - Amicus
  • A plaintiff’s ability to perform the essential functions of their job with disability-related pain and suffering is not fatal to their failure-to-accommodate claim
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	03/21/24

• Cerda v. Chicago Cubs Baseball Club (7th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court misinterpreted the ADA Standards’ requirements for the minimum size of wheelchair spaces
  • The district court misapplied the Standards’ substantial-equivalence and dispersion requirements for accessible seating
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	02/02/24

• Disability Rights Mississippi v. Fitch (5th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Section 208 entitles persons with disabilities to receive assistance from any person of their choice when returning their absentee ballot
  • Section 208 preempts Mississippi’s more restrictive law limiting who can collect absentee ballots from persons with disabilities
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	01/23/24

• Griffith v. El Paso County (10th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Intermediate scrutiny applies to the jail’s policies because they differentiate based on sex
  • Compensatory damages claims under Title II and Section 504 are not limited to violations of “settled law”
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	08/28/23

• Costin v. Glens Falls Hospital (2d Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court erred in dismissing Costin’s Section 504 claim
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	07/07/23

• Acheson Hotels v. Laufer (S. Ct.) - Amicus
  • A plaintiff ’s desire to test a defendant’s compliance with the law does not deprive her of standing to sue for a violation of a statutory right to be free from discrimination
  • Laufer lacks standing because Title III and the reservation rule do not confer a freestanding formational right on individuals who do not seek to use a hotel’s reservation service
   

  Document	Date
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 144 S. Ct. 18	12/05/23
  Brief as Amicus	06/12/23

• Howell v. The Morehouse School of Medicine (11th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court erred by categorically rejecting the availability of restarting school afresh as relief instead of applying normal equitable principles
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision	04/04/24
  Brief as Amicus	03/27/23

• Gilead Community Health Services v. Town of Cromwell (2d Cir.) - Amicus
  • The FHA authorized the jury’s punitive damages award
  • The town can be held vicariously liable for its officials’ acts in violation of the FHA
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	12/20/22

• Nawara v. Cook County (7th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Back pay is available for violations of the ADA’s prohibition against unjustified medical exams and disability-related inquiries committed against employees without disabilities
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	11/23/22

• Florida v. United States (S. Ct.) - Respondent
  • The Attorney General has the authority to bring suit to enforce Title II
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 143 S. Ct. 89	10/03/22
  Brief in Opposition	08/19/22

• Campbell v. Universal City Development Partners (11th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court did not properly evaluate whether Universal’s exclusionary policies were “necessary” under the ADA
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 72 F.4th 1245	07/07/23
  Brief as Amicus	06/09/22

• Stanley v. City of Sanford (11th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Title I prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability with respect to fringe benefits earned during an employee’s tenure but distributed post-employment
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision	10/11/23
  Brief as Amicus	04/13/22

• United States v. Mississippi (5th Cir.) - Intervenor-Appellee
  • Mississippi violated Title II of the ADA
  • The district court correctly rejected Mississippi’s assertion of a fundamental alteration defense
  • The district court properly exercised its broad discretion to enter injunctive relief
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision	09/20/23
  Brief as Intervenor-Appellee	04/06/22

• Klossner v. IADU Table Mound MHP (8th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Defendants’ acceptance of rental assistance under the Housing Choice Program is a reasonable and necessary accommodation of Klossner’s disabilities
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 65 F.4th 349	04/10/23
  Brief as Amicus	03/07/22

• Basta v. Novant Health (4th Cir.) – Amicus
  • A plaintiff’s allegations that a hospital knew that he needed an effective auxiliary aid and failed to provide one suffice to state a compensatory damages claim under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 56 F.4th 307	12/27/22
  Brief as Amicus	02/25/22

• E.T. v. Paxton (5th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Plaintiffs have standing
  • Plaintiffs were not required to exhaust the IDEA’s administrative procedures
  • GA-38 is preempted to the extent it obstructs school districts’ ability to impose masking requirements when needed to comply with their obligations under federal law
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 41 F.4th 709	07/25/22
  Brief as Amicus	01/13/22

• Disability Rights South Carolina v. McMaster (4th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The Proviso is preempted to the extent it obstructs school districts’ ability to impose masking requirements when needed to comply with their obligations under federal law
  • Plaintiffs need not allege intentional discrimination to bring a reasonable-modification claim
  • The fact that plaintiffs challenge a state funding statute did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 24 F.4th 893	01/25/22
  Brief as Amicus	11/30/21

• Raw Recovery v. Costa Mesa (9th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court applied the wrong standard in determining whether the sober living homes satisfied the “actual disability” prong of the definition of disability
  • The district court applied the wrong standard in determining whether the sober living homes satisfied the “regarded as” prong of the definition of disability
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 56 F.4th 802	01/03/23
  Brief as Amicus	11/29/21

• SoCal Recovery v. Costa Mesa (9th Cir.) - Amicus
  • The district court applied the wrong standard in determining whether the sober living homes satisfied the “actual disability” prong of the definition of disability
  • The district court applied the wrong standard in determining whether the sober living homes satisfied the “regarded as” prong of the definition of disability
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 56 F.4th 802	01/03/23
  Brief as Amicus	11/29/21

• CVS Pharmacy v. Doe (S. Ct.) - Amicus
  • Disparate-impact claims are cognizable under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Section 1557 of the ACA
   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed, reported at 142 S. Ct. 480	11/12/21
  Brief as Amicus	10/28/21

• Cushing v. Packard (1st Cir.) - Amicus
  • The Speaker cannot invoke legislative immunity because this action lies against the State
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 30 F.4th 27	03/25/22
  Brief as Amicus in Response to Court's Invitation	07/30/21

• Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller (S. Ct.) - Amicus
  • The court of appeals erred in holding that emotional distress damages are categorically unavailable for violations of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Section 1557 of the ACA and, by extension, Title VI and the other antidiscrimination statutes that incorporate its remedies
  • The decision below conflicts with the decision of another court of appeals
  • The question presented warrants review in this case
   

  Document	Date
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 142 S. Ct. 1562	04/28/22
  Brief as Amicus	08/30/21
  Certiorari Granted, reported at 141 S. Ct. 2882	07/02/21
  Brief as Amicus in Response to Court's Invitation	05/25/21

• Lange v. City of Oconto (7th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The jury instructions were erroneous and prejudicial because the Title II regulations prohibit reliance on a minor child to interpret for an individual with a disability absent an emergency in which no interpreter is available
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 28 F.4th 825	03/16/22
  Brief as Amicus	03/05/21

• Neri v. Board of Education for the Albuquerque Public Schools (10th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Discriminatory job transfers are actionable when a plaintiff brings a claim for disparate treatment under Title I of the ADA
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 860 F. App'x 556	06/14/21
  Brief as Amicus	11/16/20

• BNSF Railway v. EEOC (S. Ct.) – Respondent
  • Petitioner's contention that the court of appeals erred in concluding that petitioner perceived Holt as having a physical impairment within the meaning of the ADA does not warrant this Court’s review
  • The United States now agrees with petitioner that summary judgment in favor of the EEOC was inappropriate
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 140 S. Ct. 494	11/12/19
  Opposition to Certiorari	08/08/19

• Exby-Stolley v. Board of County Commissioners (10th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The district court’s jury instructions on plaintiff’s failure-to-accommodate claim cannot be reconciled with the plain text and purpose of Title I of the ADA
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 979 F.3d 784	10/28/20
  Brief as Amicus	03/01/19

• Stansell v. Grafton Correctional Institution (6th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Denying an inmate with a disability meaningful access to prison visitation because of his disability violates Title II and Section 504, absent applicable defenses
  • Visitation is a service, program, or activity of GCI
  • Plaintiff does not need to allege a complete exclusion from a public entity’s service, program, or activity to state a cognizable Title II or Section 504 claim
  • The district court misapplied Babcock in dismissing plaintiff’s claims
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Order, available at 2019 WL 3857021	04/18/19
  Brief as Amicus	12/12/18

• Furgess v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (3d Cir.) – Amicus
  • A State prison’s provision of showers to inmates incarcerated in its facilities is a service, program, or activity of the prison covered by Title II and Section 504
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, 933 F.3d 285	08/08/19
  Brief as Amicus	08/27/18

• Ashby v. Warrick County School Corp. (7th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The Christmas concerts at the Warrick County Museum were not services, programs, or activities of the school district
  • Even if the concerts were services, programs or activities of the school district, the school district did not violate Title II of the ADA or Section 504 and is not liable for damages
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 908 F.3d 225	11/05/18
  Brief as Amicus	08/20/18

• Silberman v. Miami Dade Transit (11th Cir.) – Amicus
  • This court should vacate the dismissal of the Title II claim and remand for the district court to consider non-constitutional grounds for avoiding the question of Eleventh Amendment immunity
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 927 F.3d 1123	06/17/19
  Brief as Amicus	04/04/18

• Dagher v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (4th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The district court’s analysis of Dagher’s claim conflicts with the ADA Amendments Act of 2008
   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	04/25/18
  Brief as Amicus	02/08/18

• Silguero v. CSL Plasma, Inc. (5th Cir.) – Amicus
  • A plasma donation center is a “service establishment” and therefore a “place of public accommodation” under Title III of the ADA
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 907 F.3d 323	10/23/18
  Brief as Amicus	02/06/18

• United States v. Florida (fna A.R. v. Secretary, Florida Agency for Health Care Administration) (11th Cir.) – Appellant; Appellee
  • The district court properly found that the United States established an Olmstead violation
  • The district court acted within its discretion in issuing the injunction
  • The United States has statutory authority to maintain this action
  • Florida has not carried its burden to obtain a stay
  • The panel’s ruling does not conflict with a Supreme Court decision and is firmly grounded in Title II’s text
  • The petition’s invocation of “federalism” is misplaced: the panel’s decision does not involve a question of exceptional importance
  • In enacting Title II, Congress ratified and incorporated longstanding administrative and judicial interpretations of the Attorney General’s authority to enforce Title VI and the Rehabilitation Act
  • The ADA’s legislative history confirms that Congress intended the Attorney General to have a cause of action to enforce Title II
  • The Attorney General’s power to file a civil action under Title II is indispensable to enforcement of the ADA
  • All courts to have addressed this question, except for the district court here, have recognized the Attorney General’s authority to sue under Title II
  • The district court erred in denying the Attorney General a cause of action to enforce Title II
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Order	02/06/24
  Brief as Appellee	11/08/23
  Opposition to Motion to Stay Pending Appeal	08/31/23
  Court of Appeals Order, reported at 21 F.4th 730	12/22/21
  Opposition to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	03/20/20
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 938 F.3d 1221	09/17/19
  Reply Brief	03/01/18
  Brief as Appellant	10/18/17

• Freyre v. Chronister (fna Gee) (11th Cir.) – Intervenor
  • This court should not consider the constitutionality of the ADA’s abrogation of Eleventh Amendment immunity unless necessary
  • The ADA’s abrogating provision, as applied to Title II claims involving public child-protective services, is valid Section 5 legislation
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 910 F.3d 1371	12/14/18
  Brief as Intervenor	10/13/17

• Magee v. Coca Cola Refreshments (S. Ct.) – Amicus
  • The court of appeals correctly held that the vending machines at issue here are not “place[s] of public accommodation” under the ADA
  • The Fifth Circuit’s decision does not conflict with any decision of another court of appeals
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 138 S. Ct. 55	10/02/17
  Brief as Amicus	07/19/17

• King v. Marion County Circuit Court (S. Ct., 7th Cir.) – Intervenor and Amicus
  • Eleventh Amendment immunity does not bar King’s Title II claim because Congress abrogated sovereign immunity
  • The district court correctly concluded that Marion Circuit Court violated Title II
  • Marion Circuit Court is subject to compensatory damages for intentional discrimination
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 138 S. Ct. 1582 (United States Waived Response to the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari)	04/16/18
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 868 F.3d 589	08/18/17
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	02/17/17

• Andrews v. City of Hartford (11th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Andrews’s complaint adequately pleads an actual disability under Section 12102(1)(A)
  • Andrews’s complaint adequately pleads a “record of” disability under Section 12102(1)(B)
  • Andrews’s complaint adequately pleads a “regarded as” disability under Section 12102(1)(C)
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision	06/30/17
  Brief as Amicus	12/12/16

• McGann v. Cinemark USA (3d Cir.) – Amicus
  • Title III’s auxiliary aids and services requirement applies to a deaf-blind moviegoer’s request for ASL tactile interpretation
  • This court should reverse and remand for consideration of Cinemark’s defenses
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 873 F.3d 218	10/06/17
  Brief as Amicus	07/18/16

• Silva v. Baptist Health South Florida, Inc. (11th Cir.) – Amicus
  • A patient need not show that her medical treatment was adversely affected to establish a claim of denial of “effective communication” under Title III and Section 504
  • The district court’s conclusion that plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive relief rested on an overly restrictive application of the required showing of future harm
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 856 F.3d 824	05/08/17
  Brief as Amicus	06/23/16

• Ivy v. Morath (S. Ct.) – Amicus
  • Based on petitioners’ assertions, it appears that this case soon will become moot
  • The anti-discrimination protections in Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act apply to the Texas agency’s driver education program
  • The Fifth Circuit’s misunderstanding of the Texas scheme does not warrant the Supreme Court’s review, given the fact-specific, idiosyncratic nature of the dispute and the absence of a conflict between the decision below and any decision of another court of appeals or state high court
   

  Document	Date
  Vacated and Remanded with instructions to Dismiss as Moot, reported at 137 S. Ct. 414	10/31/16
  Brief as Amicus (Merits)	08/30/16
  Brief as Amicus in Response to Court's Invitation	05/20/16

• Drayton v. McIntosh County (S.D. Ga.) – Intervenor
  • The Court ought to resolve the motion on non-constitutional grounds
  • If the Court were to reach the constitutional questions, it should hold that Congress validly abrogated States’ sovereign immunity to private suits under Title II of the ADA, as applied in the context of access to public services and facilities, including public transportation
   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order	06/17/16
  Intervenor’s Response in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss	04/21/16

• Michigan Protection and Advocacy Service, Inc. v. Flint Community Schools (6th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The records-access provisions of the P&A Acts apply to non-residential schools
  • MPAS was not required to exhaust administrative remedies under the IDEA
   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	02/03/17
  Brief as Amicus	04/14/16

• Chadam v. Palo Alto Unified School District (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The complaint alleges sufficient facts to support the claim that, by transferring C.C. from his neighborhood school, defendant deprived him of the benefits of a program, service, or activity or otherwise discriminated against him
  • The direct-threat exception is a defense that defendant must assert, and on which defendant bears the burden of proof, so it is not a proper basis on which to dismiss a complaint
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 666 F. App'x 615	11/15/16
  Brief as Amicus	01/21/16

• Revock v. Cowpet Bay West Condominium Association (3d Cir.) – Amicus
  • The district court erred in concluding that 42 U.S.C. 1988(a) governs FHA claims
  • Application of federal common law fulfills a need for national uniformity, meets the objectives of federal civil rights statutes, and avoids disrupting commercial relationships that rely on state law
  • Under federal common law, FHA claims survive a plaintiff’s death
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	11/23/15

• Karczewski v. Conant Auto Retail, San Diego, Inc. (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Title III of the ADA requires an automobile dealership, when it provides test drives to potential customers, to install temporary hand controls to allow test drives by individuals with disabilities if installation is readily achievable
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Memorandum	07/10/17
  Brief as Amicus	09/24/15

• Schutza v. FRN of San Diego, LLC (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Title III of the ADA requires an automobile dealership, when it provides test drives to potential customers, to install temporary hand controls to allow test drives by individuals with disabilities if installation is readily achievable
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Memorandum	07/10/17
  Brief as Amicus	09/23/15

• Karczewski v. DCH Mission Valley LLC (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Title III of the ADA requires automobile dealerships that offer test drives to install temporary hand controls for individuals with disabilities when the installation is readily achievable
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 693 F. App'x 628	07/10/17
  Brief as Amicus	09/18/15

• Schutza v. Courtesy Chevrolet Center (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Title III of the ADA requires automobile dealerships that offer test drives to install temporary hand controls for individuals with disabilities when the installation is readily achievable
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Memorandum	07/10/17
  Brief as Amicus	09/23/15

• Karczewski v. K Motors, Inc. (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • Title III of the ADA requires an automobile dealership, when it provides test drives to potential customers, to install temporary hand controls to allow test drives by individuals with disabilities if installation is readily achievable
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Memorandum	07/10/17
  Brief as Amicus	09/04/15

• Levorsen v. Octapharma Plasma (10th Cir.) – Amicus
  • A plasma donation center is a "service establishment" and thus is subject to Title III's nondiscrimination requirements
  • ADA coverage of plasma donation centers would not impair their ability to establish and follow donor eligibility criteria developed in accordance with FDA regulations to protect donor health and assure the safety of blood products
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 828 F.3d 1227	07/12/16
  Reply Brief as Amicus	06/26/15
  Brief as Amicus	05/04/15

• National Federation of the Blind v. Lamone (4th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The district court reached the correct conclusion, but that the case is most appropriately analyzed and resolved under Title II's "effective communication" regulation, rather than the "reasonable modification" provision
  • The effective communication regulation requires the provision of "auxiliary aids" when necessary to afford equal access to the benefit of a service or program, and specifically requires that auxiliary aids protect the privacy and independence of the person with a disability
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 813 F.3d 494	02/09/16
  Brief as Amicus	04/15/15

• San Francisco v. Sheehan (S. Ct.) – Amicus
  • The Americans with Disabilities Act applies to law enforcement activities and requires reasonable modifications, but does not ordinarily require police officers to alter their procedures when arresting an individual with a disability who is armed and violent
  • Petitioner officers are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established Fourth Amendment right
   

  Document	Date
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 135 S. Ct. 1765	05/18/15
  Brief as Amicus	01/16/15

• Ball v. LeBlanc (5th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The court erred in analyzing whether plaintiffs are qualified individuals with a disability under the ADA Amendments Act of 2008
  • The district court properly held that life-threatening heat conditions on Angola's death row violate plaintiffs' Eighth Amendment rights
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 792 F.3d 584	07/08/15
  Brief as Amicus	09/30/14

• Runnion v. Girl Scouts of Greater Chicago & Northwest Indiana (7th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The district court erred in determining as a matter of law that the Girl Scouts of GCNI were not "principally engaged in the business" of providing "education" or "social services"
  • In the event the Girl Scouts of GCNI provides more than one of the services enumerated in the statute, these services should be considered collectively in determining whether the "principally engaged" requirement is met
  • A remand is required for the district court to consider these bases for Section 504 coverage under the correct legal standards
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 786 F.3d 510	05/08/15
  Brief as Amicus	09/19/14

• Davis v. Shah (2d Cir.) – Amicus
  • A person with a disability can bring a claim under Title II of the ADA on the theory that a state or local government's actions create a serious risk of institutionalization for that person
  • The Second Circuit should join the Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in recognizing that a risk of institutionalization is a cognizable claim under Title II, the integration mandate, 28 C.F.R. 35.130(d), and Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999)
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 821 F.3d 231	03/24/16
  Brief as Amicus	09/15/14

• Young v. UPS (S. Ct.) – Amicus
  • Title VII requires employers to treat pregnant employees with work limitations as favorably as other groups of nonpregnant employees who are similar in their ability or inability to work
  • 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
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 135 S. Ct. 1338	03/25/15
  Brief as Amicus	09/11/14
  Certiorari Granted, reported at 134 S. Ct. 2898	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
  Court of Appeals Order	11/19/14
  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
  Dismissed	01/05/15
  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
  Court of Appeals Decision	07/09/15
  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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 582 F. App'x 114	09/03/14
  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 Tenth Circuit panel fundamentally misunderstood how the 1991 Standards apply to "spaces" in newly constructed buildings or facilities
  • The Tenth Circuit erred in rejecting plaintiffs' claim that defendants' use of its raised porches violates the text of the ADA regardless of whether the porches comply with the design standards
  • 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
  Court of Appeals Order	11/14/14
  Brief as Amicus Supporting Petition for Rehearing	10/23/14
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 765 F.3d 1205	08/29/14
  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, reported at 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, reported at 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, reported at 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, available at 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 766 F.3d 1098	09/05/14
  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, available at 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, available at 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, available at 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, reported at 701 F.3d 938	12/12/12
  Brief as Amicus	04/05/12

• McDonald v. Pennsylvania State Police (3d Cir. and W.D. Pa.) – Intervenor
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation in cases involving licensing, including professional licensing
   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, available at 2012 WL 5381403	10/31/12
  Brief as Intervenor	09/10/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 485 F. App'x 512	06/22/12
  Brief as Intervenor	03/30/12

• 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, available at 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, reported at 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, available at 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, reported at 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, reported at 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, reported at 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, reported at 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

• James v. City of Costa Mesa (9th Cir.) – Amicus
  • The district court correctly determined that the ADA's prohibition against the current use of illegal drugs neither exempts the use of medical marijuana nor does it create a repeal of the CSA by implication
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision (amended), reported at 700 F.3d 394	11/01/12
  Brief as Amicus in Response to Court's Invitation	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, available at 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
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act require the school district to allow R.K. to attend his neighborhood school unless it is necessary for him to attend a school with a nurse
  • Because R.K. did not seek any special education services and did not make claims under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, he was not required to exhaust administrative remedies under that statute
  • 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, available at 637 F. App'x 922	02/05/16
  Brief as Amicus	12/24/14
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 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, available at 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

• Frame v. City of Arlington (5th Cir.) – Amicus
  • All existing parking areas, curbs, and sidewalks are covered by Title II
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 657 F.3d 215	09/15/11
  Supplemental Brief as Amicus	03/07/11
  Brief as Amicus	09/24/10

• 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	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
  District Court Decision, available at 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

• Disability Advocates, Inc. v. Paterson, et al. (2d Cir.) – Plaintiff-Appellee
  • The motion for stay should be denied
  • NYCQAL is not a party in the State’s appeal and cannot file a brief raising new arguments concerning the merits of the State’s appeal
  • NYCQAL has not satisfied the requirements for intervention and does not have standing as a non-party appellant
  • DAI and the United States have standing to pursue their claims
  • State defendants have violated the integration mandate
  • State defendants are not entitled to a fundamental alteration defense
  • Remedial order is not overbroad
  • District court did not abuse its discretion in denying the associations’ motions to intervene
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 675 F.3d 149	04/06/12
  Brief as Appellee	10/06/10
  Motion to Stay Denied	06/23/10
  Opposition to NYCQAL’s Motion to Intervene	05/06/10
  Motion to Strike NYCQAL’S Brief in Support of the State Defendants’ Motion for Stay Pending Appeal	04/16/10
  Opposition to a Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal	04/12/10

• 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, available at 383 F. App'x 930	06/22/10
  Brief as Amicus	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	06/11/10

• Disability Rights New Jersey, Inc. v. Velez (D.N.J.) – Intervenor
  • Defendants seek summary judgment based in part on Eleventh Amendment grounds, but the Eleventh Amendment is not a bar in this case
   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order, available at 2010 WL 3862536	09/24/10
  Brief as Intervenor	05/24/10

• Hale v. King (5th Cir. and S.D. Miss.) – 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
  • The court of appeals held that Title II does not validly abrogate Eleventh Amendment immunity in the context of prison educational and work programs because it is not a congruent and proportional response to the harm the statute remedies. The Division argued that it was improper to decide the constitutional question first and asked the Fifth Circuit to rehear that decision to rule on the constitutional question first
   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order	01/15/13
  Brief as Intervenor	08/13/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 642 F.3d 492	05/26/11
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	12/01/10
  Petition for Panel Rehearing	12/01/10
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 624 F.3d 178	10/14/10
  Brief as Intervenor	04/09/10

• 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, available at 397 F. App'x 18	09/30/10
  Brief as Intervenor (Note: brief was submitted to the court, but not filed 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	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, available at 504 F. App'x 555	01/07/13
  Brief as Amicus	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, available at 414 F. App'x 764	03/08/11
  Brief as Amicus	12/21/09

• New Jersey Protection & Advocacy, Inc. v. Velez (D.N.J.) – Intervenor
  • Sovereign immunity is not a bar in this case
   

  Document	Date
  Memorandum and Order	07/23/09
  Brief as Intervenor	06/29/09

• Guttman v. Khalsa -- (D.N.M. and 10th Cir.) – Intervenor
  • The ADA validly abrogates States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II in the context of public licensing
   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	04/30/12
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	02/27/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 669 F.3d 1101	01/11/12
  Reply Brief as Appellant/Intervenor	01/10/11
  Brief as Appellant/Intervenor	10/22/10
  Memorandum Opinion and Order	03/31/10
  Brief as Intervenor	12/04/09

• 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	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, available at 313 F. App'x 843	02/23/09
  Brief as Intervenor	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, reported at 544 F.3d 798	09/12/08
  Brief as Amicus	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	11/09/07

• George v. BART (9th Cir.) -- Appellant
  • The district court erred in holding DOT’s regulatory definition of “readily accessible” invalid
  • Plaintiffs’ alternative arguments regarding the validity of DOT’s regulations are erroneous
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 577 F.3d 1005	08/13/09
  Reply Brief	02/19/08
  Brief as Appellant	10/26/07

• 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	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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 278 F. App'x 254	05/16/08
  Reply Brief	12/14/07
  Brief as Appellant	11/02/07

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 247 F. App'x 670	08/24/07
  Letter Brief as Intervenor	04/18/07

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 536 F.3d 1020	08/08/08
  Brief as Amicus	04/05/07

• 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
  Brief as Amicus	03/28/07
  Court of Appeals Decision	08/19/08

• 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
  District Court Decision, reported at 508 F. Supp. 2d 492	08/02/07
  Brief as Intervenor	01/19/07

• 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	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, reported at 549 F.3d 760	12/05/08
  Brief as Appellee	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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 469 F.3d 158	11/16/06
  Brief as Amicus	08/30/06

• George v. BART (N.D. Cal.) -- Intervenor
  • DOT's regulations satisfy the ADA and are not arbitrary and capricious
   

  Document	Date
  Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment after Remand and Granting Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment	03/20/07
  Brief as Intervenor	08/24/06

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 239 F.R.D. 9	12/09/06
  Brief as Intervenor	07/17/06

• 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
  Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment Denied And Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment Granted	07/07/06
  Brief as Intervenor	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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 470 F.3d 1261	12/13/06
  Brief as Amicus	05/25/06

• 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
  Dismissed	01/30/07
  Brief as Intervenor	04/14/06

• 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 accommodation 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 465 F.3d 737	09/26/06
  Brief as Amicus on Rehearing En Banc	11/23/05

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 214 F. App'x 424	01/18/07
  Brief as Intervenor	10/11/05

• Klingler v. Department of Revenue (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • The constitutionality of Title II and its regulations is no longer at issue in this case
   

  Document	Date
  Supplemental Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 455 F.3d 888	07/07/06
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 433 F.3d 1078	01/17/06
  Brief as Intervenor	08/31/05

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 454 F.3d 24	07/06/06
  Brief as Intervenor	08/25/05

• 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	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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 411 F.3d 474	06/13/05
  Brief as Intervenor	12/08/04

• 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
  Rehearing Denied	08/18/05
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	07/08/05
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 408 F.3d 1096	05/27/05
  Brief as Intervenor	11/26/04

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 175 F. App'x 809	03/29/06
  Brief as Amicus	10/06/04

• Guttman v. Khalsa (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 446 F.3d 1027	04/19/06
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 401 F.3d 1170	03/17/05
  Brief as Intervenor	09/10/04

• Cochran v. New Jersey Department of Corrections (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Title II of the ADA is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating prisoners' rights
   

  Document	Date
  Rehearing Granted (vacating 401 F. 3d 184), reported at 412 F.3d 500	06/17/05
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	05/27/05
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 401 F.3d 184	03/15/05
  Brief as Intervenor	07/08/04

• Miller v. King (11th Cir. and S.D. Ga.) -- Intervenor
  • This panel should delay consideration of the State's Eleventh Amendment challenge to Title II pending resolution of the same challenge by the Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Lane and by other panels of this Court already considering the same issue
  • The Eleventh Amendment is no bar to private suits against state officials in their official capacities to enjoin future violations of Title II of the Disabilities Act
  • Title II of the ADA is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating prisoners' rights
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	05/28/08
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 449 F.3d 1149	05/17/06
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	10/28/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 384 F.3d 1248	09/14/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/25/04
  Brief as Intervenor	02/10/04

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 361 F.3d 1263	03/16/04
  Brief as Amicus	11/24/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 374 F.3d 1161	07/09/04
  Brief as Intervenor	10/26/03

• McCarthy v. Hale (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Suits under Title II may be brought against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief
  • The constitutionality of Title II and Section 504 affects the merits of plaintiffs' claims, not the Court's jurisdiction under Ex Parte Young to adjudicate the claims
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation
  • Title II is valid Commerce Clause legislation
  • Title II does not violate the Tenth Amendment
  • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied, reported at 391 F.3d 676	11/19/04
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	09/30/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 381 F.3d 407	08/11/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/15/04
  Brief as Intervenor	10/24/03

• United States v. Hoyts Cinemas Corp. (1st Cir.) -- Appellee/Cross-Appellant
  • 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 380 F.3d 558	08/20/04
  Reply Brief as Cross-Appellant	11/18/03
  Brief as Appellee/Cross-Appellant	10/02/03

• Nieves-Marquez v. Puerto Rico (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Plaintiffs' claims under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 are not barred by the Eleventh Amendment
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 353 F.3d 108	12/24/03
  Brief as Intervenor	08/26/03

• Goodman v. Ray (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Because it combats an enduring problem of unconstitutional mistreatment and discrimination against individuals with disabilities, Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation
  • Title II of the ADA is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating prisoners' rights
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 449 F.3d 1152	05/17/06
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 546 U.S. 151	01/10/06
  Reply Brief	10/27/05
  Brief as Petitioner	07/29/05
  Reply Brief	04/25/05
  Petition for Writ of Certiorari	03/09/05
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	12/09/04
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	10/29/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, unpublished	09/16/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/25/04
  Brief as Intervenor	05/13/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 148 F. App'x 224	08/25/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief as Intervenor	04/12/05
  Brief as Intervenor	04/22/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 356 F.3d 641	01/12/04
  Brief as Amicus	04/03/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 410 F.3d 236	05/19/05
  Brief as Intervenor	03/20/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 70 F. App'x 630	07/14/03
  Brief as Intervenor	02/27/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 346 F.3d 937	10/07/03
  Reply Brief as Intervenor	05/16/03
  Brief as Intervenor	02/03/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 155 F. App'x 115	11/04/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief	04/22/05
  Brief as Intervenor	01/29/03

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 124 F. App'x 289	03/30/05
  Brief as Intervenor	12/10/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 383 F.3d 599	09/08/04
  Brief as Amicus	11/29/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 69 F. App'x 19	07/01/03
  Reply Brief	01/03/03
  Brief as Amicus	11/27/02

• George Lane and Beverly Jones v. State of Tennessee (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Under this Court’s holding in Popovich, there is a Due Process basis for applying Title II of the ADA to claims of denial of access to the courts by individuals with disabilities
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision (amended), reported at 315 F.3d 680	01/10/03
  Supplemental Brief On Panel Rehearing For The United States As Intervenor	11/06/02

• Shepard & United States v. Irving (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Congress validly conditioned federal funding on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	07/14/04
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	11/20/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 77 F. App'x 615	08/20/03
  Brief as Intervenor	10/28/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 341 F.3d 234	08/19/03
  Brief as Intervenor	10/24/02

• 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 prospective relief
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 328 F.3d 1181	05/14/03
  Brief as Intervenor	07/23/02

• Johnson v. Louisisana Dep't of Educ.& August v. Mitchell (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Congress 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 may be enforced against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief even if congress did not validly condition the receipt of federal financial assistance on a waiver of immunity
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 421 F.3d 342	08/15/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief	04/22/05
  Consolidated Supplemental En Banc Brief for the United States as Intervenor	10/20/03
  Reply to Petition for Rehearing En Banc for the United States as Intervenor	07/09/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 330 F.3d 362	05/05/03
  Consolidated Brief as Intervenor	07/15/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 344 F.3d 335	09/16/03
  Brief as Intervenor-Appellee	07/03/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 345 F.3d 593	10/07/03
  Brief as Intervenor	07/02/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 475 F.3d 524	02/01/07
  Brief as Intervenor	08/15/06
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 346 F.3d 402	08/20/03
  Brief as Intervenor	06/28/02

• Bruggeman v. Blagojevich (formerly Boudreau v. Ryan) (7th Cir.) -- Amicus/Intervenor
  • Title II of the ADA may be enforced against state officials for prospective relief
  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing Withdrawn	05/09/03
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	05/07/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 324 F.3d 906	04/07/03
  Brief as Intervenor	11/25/02
  Brief as Amicus	06/19/02

• 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
  Dismissed	01/17/03
  Reply Brief	08/15/02
  Brief as Intervenor	06/14/02

• Miller v. Texas Tech University (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 421 F.3d 342	08/15/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief	04/22/05
  Supplemental En Banc Brief as Intervenor	10/28/03
  Reply to Petition for Rehearing En Banc for the United States as Intervenor	07/09/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 330 F.3d 691	05/13/03
  Brief as Intervenor	06/10/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 331 F.3d 261	06/09/03
  Brief as Amicus	05/29/02

• Assoc. of Disabled Americans v. Florida International Univeristy (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • As applied to discrimination in education, Title II is congruent and proportional to the constitutional rights at issue and the history of discrimination
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 405 F.3d 954	04/06/05
  Corrected Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	07/21/04
  Brief as Intervenor	05/24/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 2002 WL 31492373	11/07/02
  Reply Brief	06/07/02
  Brief as Intervenor	04/23/02

• Project Life v. Glendening (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 46 F. App'x 147	09/04/02
  Brief as Intervenor	03/25/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 348 F.3d 569	11/06/03
  Reply Brief	03/18/02
  Brief as Appellant	03/18/02

• Kiman v. New Hampshire Dep't of Corrections (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 332 F.3d 29	06/13/03
  Supplemental En Banc Brief for the United States as Intervenor	05/05/03
  Brief as Intervenor	03/18/02

• United States v. Mississippi Dep't of Public Safety (5th Cir.) -- Appellant
  • Sovereign immunity does not bar United States from suing a state agency based on an individual's charge of discrimination under the ADA
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 321 F.3d 495	02/05/03
  Reply Brief	05/13/02
  Brief as Appellant	03/12/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 306 F.3d 203	09/26/02
  Brief as Intervenor	02/26/02

• Badillo-Santiago v. Andreau-Garcia (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 378 F.3d 1	07/29/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/28/04
  Supplemental Letter Brief as Intervenor	01/13/04
  Brief as Intervenor	02/12/02

• 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
  Dismissed	03/06/03
  Brief as Intervenor	01/11/02

• Pace v. Bogalusa City Sch. Bd. (5th Cir.) -- Amicus
  • Failure to establish a violation of the IDEA does not necessarily preclude a plaintiff's related claims under the ADA and Section 504
  • Whether a state agency’s application for and acceptance of federal financial assistance constituted an effective waiver of its sovereign immunity to suits under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
  • Whether a state agency’s application for and acceptance of funds under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) constituted an effective waiver of its sovereign immunity to suits under that statute.
  • Conditioning federal funds on a knowing and voluntary waiver of a State's Eleventh Amendment immunity is a valid exercise of Congress's Spending Clause authority
  • As applied to discrimination in education, Title II is congruent and proportional to the constitutional rights at issue and the history of discrimination
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 403 F.3d 272	03/08/05
  Second Supplemental En Banc Brief as Intervenor	07/01/04
  Supplemental En Banc Brief as Intervenor	08/12/03
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Granted, reported at 339 F.3d 348	07/17/03
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc for the United States as Intervenor	05/07/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 325 F.3d 609	03/24/03
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	10/25/02
  Brief as Amicus	01/09/02

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 275 F.3d 315	12/28/01
  Brief as Intervenor	11/02/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 309 F.3d 1203	11/06/02
  Brief as Intervenor	10/28/01

• Koslow v. Pennsylvania (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
  • Title I of the ADA may be enforced by injunction against state officials
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 302 F.3d 161	08/21/02
  Reply Brief	12/13/01
  Brief as Intervenor	10/23/01

• Garrett v. University of Alabama (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 344 F.3d 1288	09/11/03
  Reply Brief as Intervenor	05/02/03
  Brief as Intervenor	03/13/03
  Court of Appeals Decision on Rehearing, reported at 276 F.3d 1227	12/20/01
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	09/27/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 303 F.3d 1039	09/05/02
  Brief as Intervenor	07/09/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 288 F.3d 1145	05/03/02
  Brief as Intervenor	06/12/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 48 F. App'x 41	08/27/02
  Brief as Appellee 1st Appeal [PDF]	11/02/01
  Brief as Appellee 2d Appeal [PDF]	06/24/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 339 F.3d 1126	08/13/03
  Brief as Amicus	10/19/01

• Barden v.City of Sacramento (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
  • Title III of the ADA and Section 504 apply to a City's program of providing, constructing and maintaining sidewalks
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 292 F.3d 1073	06/12/02
  Brief as Amicus	08/06/01

• Popovich v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas (6th 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
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 276 F.3d 808	01/10/02
  En Banc Brief as Intervenor	05/30/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 275 F.3d 36	08/27/01
  Brief as Intervenor	05/02/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 34 F. App'x 152	03/21/02
  Brief as Intervenor	08/08/01

• 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 Denied	05/17/01
  Petition for Rehearing	04/26/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 294 F.3d 1279	06/18/02
  Brief as Amicus	04/23/01

• 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
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	02/06/02
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	11/16/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 280 F.3d 98	09/25/01
  Brief as Intervenor	04/13/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 295 F.3d 1183	07/09/02
  Brief as Intervenor	02/05/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 296 F.3d 968	07/16/02
  Brief as Amicus	01/18/01

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 304 F.3d 493	08/30/02
  Brief as Amicus	11/14/00

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 9 F. App'x 558	04/18/01
  Brief as Intervenor	11/07/00

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 264 F.3d 999	08/29/01
  Brief as Amicus	10/17/00

• Roary v. Freeman (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 3 F. App'x 114	02/14/01
  Reply Brief	10/16/00
  Brief as Intervenor	08/16/00

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 240 F.3d 1110	03/02/01
  Brief as Amicus	08/02/00

• Thompson v. Colorado (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • 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
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	10/09/01
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	09/20/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 258 F.3d 1241	08/07/01
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	04/13/01
  Brief as Intervenor	06/23/00

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 226 F.3d 1113	09/11/00
  Brief as Intervenor	05/25/00

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 230 F. 3d 991	10/25/00
  Brief as Amicus	05/12/00

• 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
  Petition for Rehearing Denied	08/02/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 281 F.3d 776	02/27/02
  Brief as Amicus	04/19/00

• Amos v. Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (4th 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
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 205 F.3d 687	03/06/00
  En Banc Reply Brief	02/22/00
  En Banc Brief as IntervenorHTML	01/21/00

• Walker v. Snyder (S. Ct. and 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
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1190	02/26/01
  Petition for Writ of Certiorari	10/10/00
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 213 F.3d 344	05/16/00
  Brief as Intervenor	12/27/99

• 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
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 532 U.S. 1064	06/04/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 205 F.3d 1001	03/07/00
  Proposed Brief as Amicus (not accepted for filing by Court of Appeals)	12/20/99

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 259 F.3d 1029	08/06/01
  Proposed Reply Brief (not accepted for filing by Court of Appeals)	12/17/99
  Brief as Amicus	10/25/99

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, unpublished	02/28/01
  Brief as Intervenor	10/12/99

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 207 F.3d 139	03/22/00
  Brief as Amicus	10/04/99

• Long v. Coast Resorts, Inc. (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
  • District court must grant injunctive relief to correct violation of Title III
  • Application of Title III to casinos
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 267 F.3d 918	10/03/01
  Brief as Amicus	09/07/99

• Botosan v. Paul McNally Realty, Inc. (9th Cir.) -- Amicus
  • No need to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing Title III lawsuit
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 216 F.3d 827	06/20/00
  Brief as Amicus	08/09/99

• Steger v. Franco, Inc. (8th Cir.) -- Amicus
  • Individuals have standing to enforce accessibility requirements of Title III without first entering establishment
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 228 F.3d 889	10/03/00
  Brief as Amicus	08/03/99

• 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
  Dismissed	07/12/99
  Brief as Intervenor	04/07/99

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 225 F.3d 1042	09/11/00
  Brief as Amicus	03/31/99

• Stevens v. Premier Cruises, Inc. (11th Cir.) -- Amicus
  • Foreign-flag cruise ships that enter United States ports must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act
  • Individual has standing to enforce accessibility requirements of Act without identifying exactly when she will use the services offered
  
   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing Denied	03/01/02
  Response to Petition for Rehearing	09/21/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 215 F.3d 1237	06/22/00
  Supplemental Brief	12/10/99
  Reply Brief	05/17/99
  Brief as Amicus	03/24/99

• 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
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 528 U.S. 1106	01/10/00
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 179 F.3d 557	06/02/99
  Brief as Amicus	02/16/99

• 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
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 528 U.S. 1114	01/18/00
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	12/21/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 171 F.3d 1289	04/07/99
  Brief as Intervenor[PDF]	10/07/98

• Martin v. PGA Tour, Inc. (S. Ct. and 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
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 532 U.S. 661	05/29/01
  Brief as Amicus	12/13/00
  Certiorari Granted, reported at 530 U.S. 1306	09/26/00
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 204 F.3d 994	03/06/00
  Brief as Amicus	08/18/98

• Jim C. v. Arkansas Department of Education (8th 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
  
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied	06/29/01
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	05/31/01
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 197 F.3d 958	12/22/00
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	10/15/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 189 F.3d 745	08/31/99
  Brief as Intervenor	06/17/98

• 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
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 194 F.3d 1116	10/25/99
  Supplemental Brief	07/22/99
  Brief as Appellee	03/06/98

• DeBose v. Nebraska (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor
  • Title I of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title I actions
  
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1190	02/26/01
  Supplemental Petition for Writ of Certiorari	01/14/00
  Petition for Writ of Certiorari	12/23/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 207 F.3d 1020	08/09/99
  Supplemental Brief	08/16/99
  Brief as Intervenor	02/02/98

• Bartlett v. New York State Board of Bar Examiners (2d Cir.) -- Amicus
  • Dyslexia is a disability; reading and writing are major life activities
  • Necessity of reasonable accommodations in taking bar examination for individual with a learning disability
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 226 F.3d 69	08/30/00
  Supplemental Brief	11/24/99
  Supreme Court Order, reported at 527 U.S. 1031	06/24/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 156 F.3d 321	09/14/98
  Brief as Amicus	01/16/98

Browse Briefs by Category

Access to Justice
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 Credit Opportunity Act
Equal Protection Clause
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