If those together don’t make the opening big enough, it might be possible to reconstruct the whole doorway and door, depending on the construction of the building. I rebuilt one doorway in my own home and it only cost around $1,000-$1500 – and that was using a very high end contractor. It was also wood frame construction and drywall, in a non-bearing wall; you’ll have a different scenario, of course, with steel, or with masonry, and/or plaster and lathe, and if it’s a bearing wall.
Of the 814 federal cases, New York and Florida led the way with more than 335 and 325 cases, respectively. Surprisingly, California only had nine new website accessibility lawsuits in 2017, most likely because plaintiffs filed in state court.  Federal courts in Arizona (6), Georgia (9), Illinois (10), Massachusetts (15), New Hampshire (2), Michigan (1), New Jersey (4), Ohio (8), Pennsylvania (58), Puerto Rico (1), Texas (7), and Virginia (24) also had their share of website accessibility lawsuits.
Privately owned multi-family dwellings are not subject to the new CBC Chapter 11B accessibility requirements for EVCS. The new requirements do apply at public housing facilities which are defined below. CBC Chapter 11B accessibility requirements do not apply to Section 8 housing credit recipients – the Section 8 program is a housing voucher program, not a public housing program.
With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams,[72] was a case in which the Supreme Court interpreted the meaning of the phrase "substantially impairs" as used in the Americans with Disabilities Act. It reversed a Sixth Court of Appeals decision to grant a partial summary judgment in favor of the respondent, Ella Williams, that qualified her inability to perform manual job-related tasks as a disability. The Court held that the "major life activity" definition in evaluating the performance of manual tasks focuses the inquiry on whether Williams was unable to perform a range of tasks central to most people in carrying out the activities of daily living. The issue is not whether Williams was unable to perform her specific job tasks. Therefore, the determination of whether an impairment rises to the level of a disability is not limited to activities in the workplace solely, but rather to manual tasks in life in general. When the Supreme Court applied this standard, it found that the Court of Appeals had incorrectly determined the presence of a disability because it relied solely on her inability to perform specific manual work tasks, which was insufficient in proving the presence of a disability. The Court of Appeals should have taken into account the evidence presented that Williams retained the ability to do personal tasks and household chores, such activities being the nature of tasks most people do in their daily lives, and placed too much emphasis on her job disability. Since the evidence showed that Williams was performing normal daily tasks, it ruled that the Court of Appeals erred when it found that Williams was disabled.[72][73] This ruling is now, however, no longer good law—it was invalidated by the ADAAA. In fact, Congress explicitly cited Toyota v. Williams in the text of the ADAAA itself as one of its driving influences for passing the ADAAA.
In general, when alterations are made to existing buildings or facilities, an accessible path of travel to the specific area of alteration shall be provided; this path of travel includes a primary entrance to the building or facility, toilet and bathing facilities serving the area of alteration, drinking fountains serving the area of alteration, public telephones serving the area of alteration, and signs as well as accessible routes which connect the area of alteration with site arrival points such as sidewalks, streets, and accessible parking (see CBC Section 11B-202.4). In general, these listed elements, if provided on the site, are required to comply with the current code requirements or be brought into compliance when an alteration occurs. In the context of EVCS, this scheme will apply when EVCS are installed at existing facilities where vehicle fueling, recharging, parking or storage is a primary function. These types of facilities include gas stations, stand-alone parking lots and stand-alone parking structures. Compliance is required to the maximum extent feasible without exceeding 20 percent of the cost of the work directly associated with the installation of EVCS (see Section 11B-202.4 Exception 10).
My husband is 92 and now confined to a wheelchair following a stroke. Back in Jan.2017 i moved us into a condo. Renting a unit from a private individual who owns tbe unit. He has been accomidating,on the other hand the HOA has not. For instance the lights have been out on the south entrance to our building for over 6 months. I have repeatedly sent emails and phone calls which mgt. Stated they will have it taken care of yet nothing ever happend. Now my husband has bruised his hands and skinned his shins attempting to enter after dark yet mgt has not responded to our request at all. Also the issue of handicapped parking spaces we were told nothing they could do because spaces are deeded to owners? Building built 1989
There have been some notable cases regarding the ADA. For example, two major hotel room marketers (Expedia.com and Hotels.com) with their business presence on the Internet were sued because its customers with disabilities could not reserve hotel rooms, through their websites without substantial extra efforts that persons without disabilities were not required to perform.[58] These represent a major potential expansion of the ADA in that this, and other similar suits (known as "bricks vs. clicks"), seeks to expand the ADA's authority to cyberspace, where entities may not have actual physical facilities that are required to comply.
Now that we have established the risks, where do we go from here? First, companies should run an accessibility scan of their webpages. There are numerous free online tools that can be used, including: http://www.wave.webaim.org and https://achecker.ca/checker/index.php. This will provide an overview of potential issues that need to be resolved. If you have in-house developers or IT, this is best handled by them. Second, look into getting ADA compliant before you receive a demand letter. Be aware however, that compliance is not cheap. Depending on your website, how much hand holding your company needs, and a few other variables, you could be looking at spending $25,000 – $50,000, on average. Third, if you receive a demand letter, make sure you hire counsel that has experience with these cases. Various legal arguments have been raised to dismiss these cases at the outset – some have been successful, but many have not. You have to consider all available options. And finally, since this will not be addressed by the DOJ anytime soon, ask your Congressperson to make sure guidelines are enacted as soon as possible. Those guidelines should take into account a business’ operations and size.
Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.[64] was a case that was decided by the United States Supreme Court in 2005. The defendant argued that as a vessel flying the flag of a foreign nation it was exempt from the requirements of the ADA. This argument was accepted by a federal court in Florida and, subsequently, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower courts on the basis that Norwegian Cruise Lines was a business headquartered in the United States whose clients were predominantly Americans and, more importantly, operated out of port facilities throughout the United States.
Prohibited discrimination may include, among other things, firing or refusing to hire someone based on a real or perceived disability, segregation, and harassment based on a disability. Covered entities are also required to provide reasonable accommodations to job applicants and employees with disabilities.[16] A reasonable accommodation is a change in the way things are typically done that the person needs because of a disability, and can include, among other things, special equipment that allows the person to perform the job, scheduling changes, and changes to the way work assignments are chosen or communicated.[17] An employer is not required to provide an accommodation that would involve undue hardship (significant difficulty or expense), and the individual who receives the accommodation must still perform the essential functions of the job and meet the normal performance requirements. An employee or applicant who currently engages in the illegal use of drugs is not considered qualified when a covered entity takes adverse action based on such use.[18]
At least one accessible route within the boundary of the site shall be provided from public transportation stops, accessible parking and accessible passenger loading zones, and public streets or sidewalks, to the accessible building entrance they serve. The accessible route shall, to the maximum extent feasible, coincide with the route for the general public. At least one accessible route shall connect accessible buildings, facilities, elements and spaces that are on the same site.
Let’s start with a bit of background. The Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted in 1990 to prohibit discrimination and ensure equal opportunity to people with disabilities. This applies to State and local government services, employment, commercial facilities, transportation, and places of public accommodation.[1] These laws can be enforced by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and through private lawsuits.
The Fair Housing Act is actually what governs the sort of modifications you are describing, not the ADA – and that has nothing to do with building codes of this sort. It requires that accommodations be made in a multifamily housing unit if they are “readily achievable”, which includes a few other requirements like being affordable – which can also get complicated, depending on what needs done, the landlord’s overall financial picture, and a whole lot more.
3 These standards apply to all CDE web content without regard to who created it, whether it was created by CDE staff, contractors, or any partner of affiliate working on behalf of CDE. Content is considered CDE content, if CDE provides direction for the creation of the content; CDE staff time to develop, approve, or maintain the content, or if non-pass-through state or federal funds distributed by CDE are used to create the content.
The new CBC accessibility requirements for EVCS specifically identify that each EVCS, whether or not accessible, provided with a point-of-sale device must provide a tactilely discernable numerical keypad, like a push-button telephone keypad or some other technology such as RFID, biometric fingerprint or other mechanism that allows access and privacy (see CBC Section 11B-707.9.1).
Specific accessibility barriers that blocked claimants access to the site were a lack of alt text or a text equivalent embedded into graphical images; empty links that cause confusion for users of screen-reading software; redundant links that cause navigation issues and repetition for users of screen-reading software; linked images without alt text to inform the user about the function of the link.
In the new construction of a new facility, all accessible rooms and spaces are required to be connected by an accessible route and all toilet facilities, drinking fountains, public telephones and signs are subject to accessibility requirements. These fundamental requirements provide accessibility in excess of that required for alterations to existing facilities so the regulations associated with path of travel requirements are not applicable to new facilities.
I am a truck driver with for a local county in northern Ca. I have been on disability for almost 9 months due to a battle with cancer and a recent surgery to remove it. My surgeon is releasing me to go back to work with some heavy restrictions to my duties, and the county says they may not be able to accommodate me. Is this legal? Don’t they have to accommodate me?
HRB Digital and HRB Tax Group have agreed to: appoint a skilled web accessibility coordinator who will report to H&R Block’s enterprise Chief Information Officer; adopt a web accessibility policy; initiate training on accessible design for its web content personnel; evaluate employee and contractor performance based on successful web access programming; conduct regular automated and user group testing; hire an approved outside consultant to prepare annual independent evaluations of Block’s online accessibility;
For close to seven years, since July of 2010, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has talked about issuing regulations specifically about web accessibility. At that time the US Department of Justice (DOJ) began developing accessibility guidelines for public websites under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). On December 26, 2017, the Department announced that those regulations were officially withdrawn.
If those together don’t make the opening big enough, it might be possible to reconstruct the whole doorway and door, depending on the construction of the building. I rebuilt one doorway in my own home and it only cost around $1,000-$1500 – and that was using a very high end contractor. It was also wood frame construction and drywall, in a non-bearing wall; you’ll have a different scenario, of course, with steel, or with masonry, and/or plaster and lathe, and if it’s a bearing wall.
And once those new customers tell their friends and relatives how they found your website, more people will know you made sure to make it ADA compliant. The fact that you put this effort into ensuring everyone was included will set you apart from your competitors. Therefore, making your site ADA compliant is a great way to get some positive press for your business.

I work in a State Government office on the second floor. It has one elevator on the West side of the building. There are stairs on the West side, mid-way, and on the East side of the building which is secured. There is handicap parking on each side of the building, but with no additonal elevators and very limited handicap parking people with disabilities are struggling. Can you tell me what if anything can be done about this matter? There is a neighboring building that has parking right in from of ours on the West side that refuses to allow anyone including those with handicap placards to park there or else be towed. Can you assist with further information?

Access Now v. Southwest Airlines was a case where the District Court decided that the website of Southwest Airlines was not in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, because the ADA is concerned with things with a physical existence and thus cannot be applied to cyberspace. Judge Patricia A. Seitz found that the "virtual ticket counter" of the website was a virtual construct, and hence not a "public place of accommodation." As such, "To expand the ADA to cover 'virtual' spaces would be to create new rights without well-defined standards."[76]


Prohibited discrimination may include, among other things, firing or refusing to hire someone based on a real or perceived disability, segregation, and harassment based on a disability. Covered entities are also required to provide reasonable accommodations to job applicants and employees with disabilities.[16] A reasonable accommodation is a change in the way things are typically done that the person needs because of a disability, and can include, among other things, special equipment that allows the person to perform the job, scheduling changes, and changes to the way work assignments are chosen or communicated.[17] An employer is not required to provide an accommodation that would involve undue hardship (significant difficulty or expense), and the individual who receives the accommodation must still perform the essential functions of the job and meet the normal performance requirements. An employee or applicant who currently engages in the illegal use of drugs is not considered qualified when a covered entity takes adverse action based on such use.[18]
Barden v. The City of Sacramento, filed in March 1999, claimed that the City of Sacramento failed to comply with the ADA when, while making public street improvements, it did not bring its sidewalks into compliance with the ADA. Certain issues were resolved in Federal Court. One issue, whether sidewalks were covered by the ADA, was appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that sidewalks were a "program" under ADA and must be made accessible to persons with disabilities. The ruling was later appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case, letting stand the ruling of the 9th Circuit Court.[62][63]
CBC Chapter 11B accessibility provisions for EVCS apply when a project consists of one or more electric vehicle charging spaces served by an electric vehicle charger or other charging equipment. Where the project does not provide charging equipment the code does not require the provision of accessible routes or other vehicle space accessibility requirements. However, it is good practice to notify the owner or owner’s representative of any additional code requirements that will be triggered by the later installation of charging equipment. The owner can use this information to determine the sequence and extent of work to be included in each phase of the project.

Specific accessibility barriers that blocked claimants access to the site were a lack of alt text or a text equivalent embedded into graphical images; empty links that cause confusion for users of screen-reading software; redundant links that cause navigation issues and repetition for users of screen-reading software; linked images without alt text to inform the user about the function of the link.
×