Oregon Paralyzed Veterans of America v. Regal Cinemas
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
339 F.3d 1126 (2003)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
Several cinemas (theaters) (defendants) in Oregon had theaters with stadium-riser seating. In this design, seats were placed on stepped risers to maximize unobstructed views for moviegoers. However, the upper sections of seats required stairs to access, meaning that patrons using wheelchairs had to sit in the first few rows of the theater, closest to the screen. These seats in the front had significantly sharper vertical viewing angles than seats further back in the theater. The Oregon Paralyzed Veterans of America and several individuals (wheelchair patrons) (plaintiffs) filed suit in federal district court, claiming that the seating plans violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Department of Justice (DOJ) regulations by creating unfair viewing difficulties for moviegoers with wheelchairs. At trial, expert testimony established that the vertical viewing angle averaged around 42 degrees for the theaters’ wheelchair seating areas and 20 degrees for the nonwheelchair seating areas. Experts stated that physical discomfort began at viewing angles exceeding 35 degrees and that unlike nondisabled viewers, the wheelchair patrons were unable to adjust their body positions in seats to compensate for the viewing-angle discomfort. The district court granted summary judgment for the theaters, finding that DOJ regulations did not require theaters to provide wheelchair users with comparable viewing angles to those provided to the general public. The wheelchair patrons appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fletcher, J.)
Dissent (Kleinfeld, 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.