The entries on this site are organized by category and by date. You are in the Amicus Briefs category. Content is posted within each category in chronological order, with the most recent entries first. For a complete list of categories and sub-categories on this site, visit the categories page. You may also find content by using the search feature or the site map. Consult the archives for content organized by date and title.
On January 13, 2010, Court Room 2 of the federal court of appeals in San Francisco was packed with people with visual and hearing impairments. The public was there to listen to oral argument about whether a lawsuit can be filed against a movie theater that refuses to provide captioning or audio description for movie-goers with disabilities. The three appellate judges hearing the case demonstrated a keen interest in the issue and grilled the lawyer for the Harkins movie chain about why his company didn’t just “do the right thing”
On January 13, 2010, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco will hear oral argument in an important case regarding the rights of movie-goers with visual and hearing impairments. The appeal challenges a 2008 District Court decision out of Arizona holding that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not require theaters to install descriptive video equipment. The Law Office of Lainey Feingold and co-counsel Linda Dardarian filed an Amicus Brief explaining that the court’s decision should be reversed.