Response to ADA Suit

[mickmomolly]

If Disney offers a settlement, then they can have it written in the settlement agreement that anyone who takes the money must voluntarily agree to not go to the parks anymore. They are not banned, it is the person's choice to accept the settlement, and the persons choice to agree never to go to disney again. So, technically allowed!

 

[CPT Tripss]

Although they may not be formally banned I believe continuing to go to a nonessential place that you are suing for not meeting your needs won't look great for your lawsuit.

When you claim that you don't get enjoyment, but rather you are harmed by WDW because of their policy change and you continue to go. . Sounds kind of pathological . . .

Disney is not a person, it is a corporation, correct?

It's kind of like Certs . . . Corporations are people and entitled to rights as recently decided in the Hobby Lobby and Citizens United cases.

 

[cmwade77]

When you claim that you don't get enjoyment, but rather you are harmed by WDW because of their policy change and you continue to go. . Sounds kind of pathological . . .



It's kind of like Certs . . . Corporations are people and entitled to rights as recently decided in the Hobby Lobby and Citizens United cases.

I think the lawsuit should seek to change policy and not to provide any money, at least if what they claim has happened.

Any monetary value should be to provide a new vacation equal to the old one once the policy changes have been made.

Anything more than that is just greedy.

 

[jcb]

http://www.wdwinfo.com/news/General...ility_Access_lawsuit_must_file_separately.htm

 

[aaarcher86]

http://www.wdwinfo.com/news/General_Disney_News/Families_in_Disney_s_Disability_Access_lawsuit_must_file_separately.htm

Does that dismiss the group lawsuit then?

 

[wilkeliza]

Does that dismiss the group lawsuit then?

Yes they are basically saying this doesn't fall under class action because there are too many variables.

 

[jcb]

The DAS lawsuit was never a class action nor a proposed class action. The families wanted to join all of their claims into one lawsuit. The word "group" is as good as any non-legal term to describe the lawsuit the families filed (the legal term is "joinder" but that term is too arcane). This ruling "severed" the "group" lawsuit. The first family named in the group filing does not have to file a new lawsuit but all the other families have to file separate lawsuits. The judge said she will hear all the lawsuits, and I expect they may be "consolidated" for some purposes or rulings, but the ruling makes it clear that the judge will not have one trial for all the families.

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

Yes they are basically saying this doesn't fall under class action because there are too many variables.

So this leads me to wonder:
1. How many of these families will pursue an individual lawsuit?
2. If people pursue individual lawsuits, are they doing it for financial gain, or policy change?
3. Are multiple individual lawsuits enough to prompt Disney to make a policy change?

 

[wilkeliza]

The DAS lawsuit was never a class action nor a proposed class action. The families wanted to join all of their claims into one lawsuit. The word "group" is as good as any non-legal term to describe the lawsuit the families filed (the legal term is "joinder" but that term is too arcane). This ruling "severed" the "group" lawsuit. The first family named in the group filing does not have to file a new lawsuit but all the other families have to file separate lawsuits. The judge said she will hear all the lawsuits, and I expect they may be "consolidated" for some purposes or rulings, but the ruling makes it clear that the judge will not have one trial for all the families.

Sorry about the misuse of terms. I had read that it was a class action and thought it was. I didn't realize several groups could jointly sue and it not be a class action.

 

[jcb]

So this leads me to wonder:
1. How many of these families will pursue an individual lawsuit?
2. If people pursue individual lawsuits, are they doing it for financial gain, or policy change?
3. Are multiple individual lawsuits enough to prompt Disney to make a policy change?

I can't answer 1 or 2 without speculating.

For 3, if the court were to hold DAS violated the ADA in one of the lawsuits, that would set a precedent for other lawsuits where the facts were nearly identical. The ruling (unless overturned) would undoubtedly be held against WDW in the other lawsuits and could, in theory, force WDW to change DAS. The fact that all ladders have multiple warning labels on them proves that one lawsuit can bring about change. My favorite is the chain saw manual which warns against sitting on the outside of the limb while you are cutting off the limb:



Of course, my answer to "3" is also based on speculation.

 

[jcb]

Sorry about the misuse of terms. I had read that it was a class action and thought it was. I didn't realize several groups could jointly sue and it not be a class action.

No worries. There is a difference but it is a quite confusing area. I doubt that even if the families had tried to file the lawsuit as a class action that the judge would have let it go forward as a class action. She made it clear the families' claims were too different.

 

[SueM in MN]

THanks for the update, Jack. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.