Burriola v. Greater Toledo YMCA

133 F. Supp. 2d 1034 (2001)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Burriola v. Greater Toledo YMCA

United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
133 F. Supp. 2d 1034 (2001)

Facts

Jordan Burriola was a child with autism and was admitted to the daycare program (program) operated by YMCA of Greater Toledo (YMCA) (defendant). YMCA notified Melissa Burriola (plaintiff), Jordan’s mother, of several instances of Jordan exhibiting inappropriate behavior, including violent and destructive behaviors on occasions when Jordan became extremely frustrated. Burriola informed YMCA of ways to work successfully with Jordan. The suggested modifications included preparing a daily schedule for Jordan, which would require a few minutes to make; watching Jordan’s behavior for warning signs of frustration, such as louder verbal communication, increased arm and leg movement, and crying sounds; using signs as visual signals (visuals), instead of auditory commands, to redirect Jordan’s behavior; and using a break card to direct Jordan to use a quiet break place. The visuals and break-card supports were provided to YMCA for free, and free training was made available to YMCA counselors. The training required two and a half hours. According to Burriola, the use of a schedule would prevent Jordan from becoming frustrated and exhibiting the warning signs. The suggested modifications were not implemented. Additionally, after counselors who had received training left the program, no additional counselors were trained. After 20 months, YMCA terminated Jordan from the program. Burriola brought an action against YMCA under the Americans with Disabilities Act (act) for unlawfully terminating Jordan from the program based on his disability. Burriola moved for a preliminary injunction requiring YMCA to make appropriate modifications and reinstate Jordan in the program. YMCA’s daycare facility was a place of public accommodation under the act.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Carr, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 734,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership