Access Now, Inc. v. Town of Jasper, Tennessee case
brief
268 F.Supp.2d 973
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
CASE SYNOPSIS: Plaintiffs,
an organization and a mother acting on behalf of her minor daughter,
sought declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against defendant
town pursuant to Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act
(ADA), 42 U.S.C.S. § 12131 et seq. The mother contended that the
town's refusal to provide a reasonable modification to its ordinance
to allow her daughter to keep a horse at her residence to assist her
violated Title II of the ADA.
FACTS: The daughter suffered from the congenital birth defect spina bifida. The organization and the mother contended that the daughter was a qualified individual with a disability under Title II of the ADA and that she needed the horse to assist her as a service animal. The court found that the organization and the mother had not met their burden of proving essential elements of their ADA claim by a preponderance of the evidence because (1) the daughter was not a qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.S. § 12131(2) because the evidence clearly showed that the daughter was not substantially limited in the major life activities of walking, standing, and caring for herself, and thus the daughter was not disabled under the terms of the ADA; (2) the horse was not a service animal because the daughter was not disabled within the meaning of the ADA and thus did not need to utilize the horse as a service animal; and (3) the ADA did not require the town to modify its policy and ordinance to accommodate the daughter because the organization and the mother had not met their burden of proving that the daughter had a disability under the ADA.
CONCLUSION: The court granted judgment in favor of the town and against the organization and the mother. The organization and the mother's complaint was dismissed with prejudice. The town was entitled to recover its costs of the action.
FACTS: The daughter suffered from the congenital birth defect spina bifida. The organization and the mother contended that the daughter was a qualified individual with a disability under Title II of the ADA and that she needed the horse to assist her as a service animal. The court found that the organization and the mother had not met their burden of proving essential elements of their ADA claim by a preponderance of the evidence because (1) the daughter was not a qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.S. § 12131(2) because the evidence clearly showed that the daughter was not substantially limited in the major life activities of walking, standing, and caring for herself, and thus the daughter was not disabled under the terms of the ADA; (2) the horse was not a service animal because the daughter was not disabled within the meaning of the ADA and thus did not need to utilize the horse as a service animal; and (3) the ADA did not require the town to modify its policy and ordinance to accommodate the daughter because the organization and the mother had not met their burden of proving that the daughter had a disability under the ADA.
CONCLUSION: The court granted judgment in favor of the town and against the organization and the mother. The organization and the mother's complaint was dismissed with prejudice. The town was entitled to recover its costs of the action.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment