I finally had a chance to read the decision in its entirety without falling asleep more than once. I have a few thoughts about where this decision leaves the lawsuits by other guests with Autism spectrum disorder ("plaintiffs"). I'm not going to spend my Saturday researching the tortured history of this six-year old lawsuit so I'll be a little less precise than normal. (Don't @ me; deal with it.
)
As filed in early April 2014, the complaint included 15 different families. They alleged a variety of claims, state and federal, based on Florida and California law. The families filed the lawsuit in California but a number of the families only alleged ADA violations at Walt Disney World. The lawsuit wasn't filed as a "class action" (this is a term of art) but sought to "join" (another term of art) all the families claims into one lawsuit. It grew with additional families.
Disney moved to transfer the WDW claims to Florida arguing that "24 of the 26 plaintiffs (including the lead plaintiff A.L.) who brought this case in California only complain of experiences in Florida." The California court agreed and sent the families to Florida. (
https://www.wdwinfo.com/news/Genera...ey_transferred_from_California_to_Florida.htm)
Once in Florida, the plaintiffs tried to add 30 more families prompting Judge Conway to rule that trying 44 lawsuits with multiple claims at one time was unmanageable so she "severed" the families' claims into 44 separate lawsuits. Some of these were later voluntarily dismissed. Judge Conway refused to try any California claims in Florida and dismissed those (they were refiled in California).
By this point, the only claims pending in Florida alleged a violation of Title III of the ADA and Judge Conway later dismissed that, ruling the families failed to present enough evidence to warrant a trial. (
https://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories/federal-court-rules-for-disney-in-lead-dasautism-lawsuit/)
The appeals court later reversed this dismissal in part (
https://www.wdwinfo.com/news-storie...ul-autism-lawsuits-against-disney-to-proceed/) and that decision naturally plays a central role in Judge Conway's recent decision (she can't ignore it, after all). One of the key rulings in the appeal was that the adoption of
DAS did not violate the ADA. Disney's issuing a DAS Card to all cognitively disabled guests is not per se impermissible under Title III of the ADA."
A.L. by & through D.L. v. Walt Disney Parks & Resorts US, Inc., 900 F.3d 1270, 1292 (11th Cir. 2018). (
https://www.disboards.com/threads/a...wsuit-over-disability-access-service.3701176/)
The court of appeals told Judge Conway to have a trial on whether the sought for modifications were "necessary." It did not rule one way or the other and it did not address whether the desired modifications were "reasonable" or would "fundamentally alter" the park experience, leaving this for Judge Conway to decide.
At this point, Disney did something smart, they decided to try the case instead of filing more motions. Judge Conway set one of the cases (the "lead" plaintiff "A.L.") for trial in February 2020 and it lasted 2 or 3 days. (
https://www.disboards.com/threads/w...or-the-bed-bugs-lawsuit.3754820/post-61154120 and
https://www.disboards.com/threads/w...020-bedtime-for-the-bed-bugs-lawsuit.3754820/)
Judge Conway ruled for WDW on all three grounds. The "necessary' and "reasonable" rulings (which seem to me to be very closely related) are very much linked to this plaintiff's abilities. There are other rulings tied to "A.L.'s" specific case which could, in theory, lead to a different result. His lawyers didn't get the trail date on their expert's schedule, A.L.'s caregiver essentially gave up without really trying to see if DAS would work for him and Judge Conway's decision focused on what was necessary and reasonable to accommodate A.L.'s actual behavioral needs from his autism.
(Let's get one issue out of the way, this ruling does not apply to or "bind" the other plaintiffs. They could, if they wanted, have their day in court.)
Disney's expert categorized "A.L. as having a "moderate" condition. So, another plaintiff who has a more severe condition might, in theory, be able to prove they need more than DAS to have a "like experience" at WDW.
In reality, if a guest has to much more of a severe condition, they may not be able to experience WDW at all. Further, the "reasonable" inquiry turned on A.L's demand for 10 readmission passes for A.L. and everyone in his party and Judge Conway said that was not reasonable because it would severely impact the remaining non-DAS users by significantly increasing wait times and potentially lead to the same fraud and abuse as GAC.
A key part of this finding was that Department of Justice regulations do not permit Disney to ask guests for proof of their disability and if Disney gives one guest 10 readmission passes, it will end up having to do this for other guests who claim to have autism spectrum disorder (or a similar disorder that makes waiting in line difficult). I've expressed some skepticism of the DOJ rule. It makes no sense to me. In the employment context, Title I of the ADA permits employers' to request information about an employee's specific needs under certain situations so what sense does it make to prohibit businesses from doing so under Title III. Practically, of course, this would be nightmare because it would rely on cast members to discern in a matter of minutes what are often complex medical diagnoses (no slam on CM's is meant, I read a lot of medical records and they complex). But I digress.
So, one of the other plaintiffs might be able to persuade Judge Conway that they didn't need 10 readmission passes but it would be "reasonable" for them to receive 6 to 8 readmission passes in addition to DAS. This, of course, is speculation. Disney would still present evidence that every readmission pass increases the standby wait time.
So, in theory, the necessary and reasonable holdings might change depending on the facts. What will likely sink the remaining plaintiffs is the ruling that the requested modification would "fundamentally alter" the Disney Park experience. While this was based on the impact of A.L.'s request for 10 readmission passes, Disney persuaded Judge Conway this would increase standby wait times, reduce Disney's return business and essentially return to the abuses of GAC. Again, in theory, a different case could lead to a different result but practically, that would be threading a small needle with a large thread.
By the way, Judge Conway appropriately distinguished the
Colonial Williamsburg decision she cited. I find the decision problematic but its problems likely stemmed from the park's decision not to put on evidence about the impact of permitting sack lunches in dining rooms.
So, what happens next? Judge Conway will probably put down an order. She may set the next case for trial (though there are few in person trials right now) or she may schedule a conference (call) to discuss the remaining cases.
You'll remember that Judge Conway awarded Disney's its costs. Disney might offer not to seek "costs" against the other families if they agree to dismiss the lawsuits. After losing (spectacularly) on all three grounds in the first lawsuit, the families' counsel has to be questioning how much more of a chance he has in the other lawsuits.
I will ask one question. Where do I ride "Buzz Light year’s Midway Mania?"
A.L. can appeal. Unlike the last appeal, this time, the appeals court would have to defer to Judge Conway's fact findings and it is highly unlikely to set those aside. If there are realistically successful issues to make on appeal, it is whether ADA Title III and the DOJ regulation prohibit Disney from obtaining specific information about a guest's disability and whether Disney would have had to apply A.L.'s sought-for accommodation to other guests (these are logically linked). I don't recall whether the plaintiffs preserved these issues for appeal. I also have to wonder why a disability advocate (remember she made comments about the trial on Facebook during the trial) would make arguments on appeal that are against the interests of anyone who has a disability.
I doubt Judge Conway will wait on the result of an appeal before moving forward with the other lawsuits. So, it isn't over, even after six years, but the score on "Buzz Light year's Midway Mania" is approaching zero.
