PITTSBURGH – A disabled Florida resident has voluntarily dismissed litigation that a Quality Inn hotel in Coraopolis was supposedly not accommodating to her condition and that as a result, she suffered disability-related discrimination.
Deborah Laufer of Pasco City, Fla. initially filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on July 21 versus Radhe Krishna, LLC, of Coraopolis.
Laufer said she is an individual with disabilities as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and is confined to moving only with the use of an assisting device, such as a wheelchair or cane. She must use a handicap-accessible parking space and properly designed sinks, doors, rooms, etc.
“As the owner of the subject place of lodging, defendant is required to comply with the ADA. As such, defendant is required to ensure that its place of lodging is in compliance with the standards applicable to places of public accommodation, as set forth in the regulations promulgated by the Department of Justice. These regulations impose requirements pertaining to places of public accommodation, including places of lodging, to ensure that they are accessible to disabled individuals,” the suit said.
Laufer used the websites of Booking, Priceline, Agoda, Expedia and Orbitz to review the accessibility of the defendant property, but found no pertinent information, allegedly due to the defendant’s negligence and non-compliance with the ADA.
“Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer direct and indirect injury as a result of the defendant’s discrimination until the defendant is compelled to modify its websites to comply with the requirements of the ADA and to continually monitor and ensure that the subject websites remains in compliance,” the suit stated.
“Plaintiff has a realistic, credible, existing and continuing threat of discrimination from the defendant’s non-compliance with the ADA with respect to these websites. Plaintiff has reasonable grounds to believe that she will continue to be subjected to discrimination in violation of the ADA by the defendant.”
Laufer said she was discriminated against by being denied access to and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations of the subject website, and that herself and similarly-situated individuals will continue to suffer discrimination, injury and damage without the immediate relief provided by the ADA.
UPDATE
On Aug. 21, counsel for Laufer explained that his client voluntarily dismissed her case.
“Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby notifies this Court pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(i) that this action is dismissed with prejudice as to all claims, causes of action and parties, with each party bearing that party’s own attorney’s fees and costs,” Laufer’s dismissal order read.
F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(i) states that a plaintiff may issue a notice of dismissal without a court order before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.
“It is ordered that this action be, and hereby is, dismissed with prejudice as to all claims, causes of action and parties, with each party bearing that party’s own attorney’s fees and costs. The Clerk is directed to close the file,” U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Robert J. Colville said.
Prior to dismissal and for counts of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, the plaintiff was seeking attorney’s fees, costs and litigation expenses, other relief as the Court deems just and proper, and/or is allowable under Title III of the ADA.
Additionally, the plaintiff had sought:
• The Court to issue a Declaratory Judgment that determines that the defendant at the commencement of the subject lawsuit is in violation of Title III of the ADA;
• Injunctive relief against the defendant, including an order to revise its websites to comply with 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e) and to implement a policy to monitor and maintain the websites to ensure that it remains in compliance with said requirement.
The plaintiff was represented by Tristan Wade Gillespie of The Gillespie Law Firm, in Johns Creek, Ga.
The defendant did not secure legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-01090
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com