Settlement agreements and consent decrees

These are cases brought to court under the ADA/504 Titles I, II, and III. It inludes Supreme Court decisions.

Links

Guckenberger v Boston University

Guckenberger v Boston University (Course substitution)

Bartlett v Law Examiners

Test Accommodations

Huezo v LACCD

Marvin HUEZO, v.LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT (Re: Los Angeles Pierce College) (Facility access & barrier removal)

Southeastern v Davis

Southeastern Community College v. Davis (Physical qualifications for admission to clinical training programs).

Wong v Regents of University of California

Wong v. Regents of the University of California (LD Accommodations in Medical School)

ADA Title III DOJ V NBME

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND NATIONAL BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS

Bonnette v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Dist. Court, Dist. of Columbia 2011

Use of computer equipped with an accessible screen-reading program called JAWS (which stands for Job Access With Speech) that is commonly used by individuals with visual impairments to access Multistate Bar Exam.

Enyart v. National Conference of Bar Examiners, 630 F. 3d 1153 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2011

Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam and the Multistate Bar Exam using a computer equipped with assistive technology software known as JAWS and ZoomText.

Turner v. Association of American Medical Colleges, 167 Cal. App. 4th 1401 - Cal: Court of Appeals

AAMC argues that neither the Unruh Civil Rights Act nor the DPA require it to provide testing accommodations to disabled individuals taking a standardized test such as the MCAT

Turner v. Association of American Medical Colleges, 193 Cal. App. 4th 1047 - Cal: Court of Appeals, 1st Appellate Dist., 5th Div. 2011

In Turner v. Association of American Medical Colleges (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1401 [85 Cal.Rptr.3d 94] (Turner I), this court held that, when taking a standardized test, individuals with learning disabilities and other conditions affecting their ability to read are not entitled to accommodations under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51)[1] and Disabled Persons Act (DPA) (§ 54 et seq.). We reversed the trial court's decision in favor of plaintiffs.

VETERANS FOR COMMON SENSE v. Nicholson, Dist. Court, ND California 2008

Plaintiffs are non-profit organizations that represent the interests of veterans of the Iraq, Afghanistan and earlier conflicts who have sought medical treatment or filed disability claims based on Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder ("PTSD").

Documents

CSUSBNoticeofSettlement

Cal State San Bernardino Settlement statement (2007) (Where do we start?....Office hours, note takers, motorized carts, alternate formats, testing accommodations, Campus labs access and hours, emergency evacuation, architectural barriers, etc.

Hayden v College of Redwoods (deaf meaningful access)

Hayden v. Redwoods Community College District (Interpreters)

WYNNE V TUFTS

Wynne V. Tufts ( multiple choice examinations)

Alexander v Choate

Alexander v. Choate (Discrimination under 504 Medicaid)

Cleburne v Cleburne ILC

City of Cleburne v Cleburne Independent Living Center (Discrimination group homes)

Lau v. Nichols

Lau v. Nichols (ESL and Civil Rights)

School Board of Nassau County v Arline

School Board of Nassau County v Arline (Record of an impairment)

HUMPHREY v Memorial Hospital

Humphrey v. Memorial Hospital (Wrongful termination due to disability)

Gonzalez v NBME

Gonzales v NBME (test accommodations)

Herzog-Loyola 2009_0

TIMOTHY HERZOG v. LOYOLA COLLEGE IN MARYLAND, (Discrimination)