LACCD’s attorney, David Urban of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, said in an email that they are “evaluating the decision, pleased the Ninth Circuit accepted arguments that LACCD presented, and planning next steps.”
The 9th Circuit has long recognized that right, but questioned it last year in an unrelated case – citing a 2001 Supreme Court decision interpreting the 1964 Civil Rights Act – and ordered both LACCD and the plaintiffs to brief the issue. “The court clearly ruled that there is a private right of action for disparate-impact claims under Title II (of the ADA) and Section 504,” Espo said. In a 2-1 split, the panel rejected Los Angeles Community College District’s argument that the Americans with Disabilities Act and its predecessor, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, did not authorize private lawsuits for disparate-impact claims by two former students, the National Federation of the Blind and its California affiliate.Īlthough the panel unanimously overturned the judgment on other grounds and remanded the case for further proceedings, “we consider this a win, for all people with disabilities,” said Joseph Espo of Brown, Goldstein & Levy, which represented plaintiffs Roy Payan, Portia Mason, and the organizations. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday held that individuals with disabilities can sue over practices that have a discriminatory effect on them even if no discrimination was intended. (Reuters) - Defusing a potential landmine it planted last year, the 9th U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
