Molski v. Foley Estates Vineyard and Winery

531 F.3d 1043 (2008)

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

Molski v. Foley Estates Vineyard and Winery

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
531 F.3d 1043 (2008)

  • Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD

Facts

Jarek Molski (plaintiff) used a wheelchair for mobility and encountered multiple physical barriers to entry during a visit to Foley Estates Vineyard and Winery, LLC (Foley) (defendant), including an overly steep entrance ramp, raised thresholds in doorways, narrow door widths, and high counters. Molski, along with Disability Rights Enforcement, Education, Services (plaintiff), filed suit against Foley for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Before trial, Foley underwent substantial renovations to provide its wine-tasting services in a gazebo with wheelchair-accessible ramps and a bell to summon staff members for assistance. During the trial, the county’s historic-landmarks commission declared Foley a place of historical merit. Testimony presented at trial established proposed plans and costs for renovations inside and outside of the main winery building, but Foley’s historical expert stated that an access ramp into the building would severely impact the facility’s historical nature. The district court found that the removal of interior barriers would be readily achievable but that removal of the exterior barriers and creation of an access ramp would not be readily achievable due to the historical significance of the building. The court further held that ADA regulation 28 C.F.R. § 36.405 and § 4.1.7 of the ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Building and Facilities (ADAAG) did not apply to barrier removal for existing facilities. The court issued an injunction to compel internal renovations of Foley’s building but declined to compel exterior barrier removal. Both parties appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Nelson, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Fernandez, 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 741,000 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 741,000 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 741,000 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