Duffy v. Riveland
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
98 F.3d 447 (1996)
- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
Sean Duffy (plaintiff) was a hearing-impaired inmate at the Washington State Department of Corrections (department) (defendant). While he was in prison, Duffy was charged with indecent exposure. A disciplinary hearing was scheduled. The department offered to provide Duffy with a sign-language interpreter for the hearing. The interpreter, Frances Linder, had no formal training in sign language and was not a professional interpreter. Further, when Linder had interpreted for Duffy in the past, Linder had signed in a way that was not related to Duffy’s signs. Thus, Duffy believed that Linder was not a qualified interpreter, and he refused to attend the hearing. The hearing took place in Duffy’s absence, and Duffy was found guilty of indecent exposure. Subsequently, Duffy filed suit, contending that the department violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The district court granted summary judgment to the department. Duffy appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Poole, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
