Maureen T. DeSimone was recently quoted in an article appearing in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly concerning the limited remedies available to individuals filing Title V relation claims for public accommodation under Title III of the ADA. The article is titled: “Student can’t pursue damages for ADA retaliation.”
The article starts by reviewing the facts of a case of first impression in front of the First Circuit Court of Appeals. In G., et al. v. The Fay School, et al., Plaintiff, a student at the Fay School in Southborough, MA, where he previously attended, claimed the school failed to accommodate his electromagnetic hypersensitivity when they refused to remove Wi-Fi from the school. All of Plaintiff’s claims were dismissed or were deemed “moot” because he had left the school.
The article then discusses how the court of appeals addressed the issue (one of first impression) whether monetary damages were available under a “Title V retaliation claim based on an exercise of rights under Title III of the ADA.” Under a very strict reading of the language in the ADA statute, the court determined that the only remedy available to Title III claims were injunctions. Plaintiff had already completed 9th grade at another school and because 9th grade was the last year a student could attend The Fay School, the remedy of an injunction was moot (Plaintiff conceded this fact). Thus, no remedy was available to Plaintiff.
Click here to read the full article on-line (subscription required).