Search

The article focuses on the Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the ADA) and the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice can solve predatory litigation. It mentions increase in website accessibility lawsuits where plaintiffs allege violations of Title III of the ADA. It also mentions DOJ promulgate regulations in which the level of website compliance will depend upon the website's intended use and website accessibility standards.

The article discusses the reasonable accommodation under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). It mentions that ADA is designed to prevent discrimination and to preserve the integrity of an employer's hiring system when an employee becomes disabled. It mentions that employment agencies and courts have interpreted the ambiguous provision differently.

The article claims in support of the idea that Title II applies to hosts providing public accommodations in the sharing economy. Topics discussed include the lawsuit against Airbnb alleging race discrimination, "Selden v. Airbnb, Inc.;" advancements in public accommodations that applies to the sharing economy; and regulation of landlords under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.

The article informs about the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and its implementing regulations, and discusses inquiries by bar examiners of applicant's mental health violating the ADA. It discusses several lawsuits on the same such Ellen S. v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners. It mentions the settlement between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Louisiana Supreme Court under which Louisiana has eliminated mental health questions from its bar application.

The article discusses the legal aspects of stuttering in the workplace as of March 2012, focusing on employment discrimination against stutterers, as well as a call for stuttering to be considered a disability protected by the Americans With Disabilities Act as amended in 2008. The coverage of stuttering under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is also considered in terms of a person's civil right to speak differently than others.