ANDERSON v. THE FRANKLIN INSTITUTE, 13-5374. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20160510593
Visitors: 23
Filed: May 06, 2016
Latest Update: May 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH , District Judge . This 6th day of May, 2016, for the reasons explained in the foregoing Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. The Court hereby DECLARES that Defendant The Franklin Institute is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12181 et seq., for failure to reasonably modify its policies and practices to acco
Summary: ORDER GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH , District Judge . This 6th day of May, 2016, for the reasons explained in the foregoing Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. The Court hereby DECLARES that Defendant The Franklin Institute is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12181 et seq., for failure to reasonably modify its policies and practices to accom..
More
ORDER
GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH, District Judge.
This 6th day of May, 2016, for the reasons explained in the foregoing Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
The Court hereby DECLARES that Defendant The Franklin Institute is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181 et seq., for failure to reasonably modify its policies and practices to accommodate people with disabilities protected by the Act. Defendant is hereby ENJOINED from continuing these discriminatory practices and ORDERED to adopt a clear and enforceable policy and practice of waiving any and all admission fees for paid Personal Care Attendants accompanying severely disabled clients in a formal capacity as defined in the foregoing Memorandum Opinion.
Defendant's footnote request that the exhibits attached to Plaintiffs' Motion marked "confidential" be removed from the docket pursuant to the parties' Protective Order (Doc. 40) is GRANTED. The Clerk's Office shall REFILE those documents UNDER SEAL.
Source: Leagle
