Federal Lawsuits Revived on Autism Accommodations at Disney
The appeals court decision came in 30 consolidated cases that involve allegations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and deal with Disney parks in Florida and California.
August 21, 2018 at 12:18 PM
4 minute read
In a detailed, 65-page ruling, a federal appeals court said a trial is needed in a legal battle about whether Disney theme parks have taken adequate steps to meet the needs of customers who have autism and cannot wait long times for rides.
A lower-court judge had granted summary judgment for Walt Disney Parks and Resorts — ruling without holding a full-blown trial — in lawsuits filed on behalf of people with autism. But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on Friday sent the case back and said some key issues need to be resolved in a trial.
The appeals court decision came in 30 consolidated cases that involve allegations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and deal with Disney parks in Florida and California. The decision does not resolve the underlying issues, but it gives the plaintiffs another chance to try to prove allegations that accommodations at the parks are not adequate.
The cases focus on problems that people with autism have in waiting for rides and their need for pre-set orders of events, with the appeals court saying that parents had testified about autistic children having “meltdowns” when they wait for rides or routines are disrupted.
“Plaintiffs allege that their severe disabilities include an inability to comprehend the concept of time, defer gratification, and wait for rides, as well as strict adherence to a pre-set routine of rides in a specific order,” said Friday's ruling, written by Judge Frank Hull and joined by Judges Kevin Newsom and C. Ashley Royal. “Plaintiffs therefore contend that access to all of Disney's rides must be both nearly immediate and in each plaintiff's individual, pre-set order to accommodate fully their impairments.”
But Disney has argued it properly accommodates the needs of people with autism through a “Disability Access Service” program that it began in 2013. The appeals court said the program provides “significant benefits,” including allowing people with disabilities to get scheduled times for rides; allowing them to avoid having to physically stand in line for rides; and allowing them to immediately enter rides that have waits of less than 15 minutes.
In a 2016 summary judgment ruling for Disney, U.S. District Judge Anne Conway wrote that Disney began the Disability Access Service program to replace an earlier program that had been abused by park-goers, including by people who did not need special accommodations. Ruling in a case whose plaintiff was identified by the initials A.L., Conway wrote that the Disability Access Service program and what are known as “readmission” passes “afford plaintiff a similar, or better, experience as those not needing them.”
“Plaintiff was given an opportunity to experience Magic Kingdom in a similar manner as guests that do not need accommodations. … In the present case, nondisabled guests visit Magic Kingdom for rides and attractions that most of them have to wait more than an hour to experience,” wrote Conway, a judge in the federal Middle District of Florida. “Comparing this to plaintiff's experience, DAS and readmission passes allow him access to those same rides in a fraction of the time.”
The appeals court Friday said the plaintiffs are seeking a maximum wait of 10 to 15 minutes for all rides. The ruling acknowledged that the Disabled Access Service program allows people with autism to access rides quicker than other park customers but indicated that doesn't resolve the legal questions.
“Although the DAS card is a significant benefit, we conclude that factual disputes still exist about behavioral features of plaintiffs' impairments that make it more difficult to evaluate whether the DAS program provides a like experience [as other customers have],” the ruling said. “Plaintiffs' evidence posits that waiting for rides in the over-stimulated environment of a theme park, even virtually with the DAS card, is beyond the capacity of plaintiffs given the specific and severe nature of their disabilities.”
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste Class Action
3 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readDisbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250