United States Ninth Circuit

In an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) action claiming discriminatory accommodations at defendant's movie theaters, dismissal of the action is reversed where the district court was correct in holding that the ADA does not require Harkins to utilize open captioning as a matter of law, but closed captioning and audio descriptions were "auxiliary aids and services" that a movie theater may be required to provide under the ADA.

Appellate Information

• Argued 01/13/2010
• Decided 04/30/2010
• Published 04/30/2010

Judges

• Before: ALEX KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, PROCTER HUG, JR. and RICHARD R. CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Rose A. Daly-Rooney and Cathleen M. Dooley, Assistant Attorneys General, Tucson, AZ, for the appellants., Jose de JesusV. Rico, Arizona Center for Disability Law, Tucson, AR, for the appellants-intervenors., Brian East, Advocacy, Inc., Austin, TX; Linda M. Dardarian, Goldstein, Demchak, Baller, Borgen & Dardarian, Oakland, CA; John F. Stanton, Howrey LLP, Washington, D.C.; John F. Waldo, Washington State Communication Access Project, Bainbridge Island, WA; Marc P. Charmatz, National Association of the Deaf Law and Advocacy Center, Silver Spring, MD; Angela M. Miller, Attorney, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; M. Brett Burns, Hunton & Williams LLP, San Francisco, CA; Steven John Fellman, GKG Law, PC, Washington, D.C., for the amici curiae.


• For Appellees:
  
• John J. Egbert, The Collier Center, Phoenix, AZ, and Richard Lustiger, General Counsel, Harkins Theatres, Scottsdale, AZ, for the appellees.