28 C.F.R. § 36.501

Private suits

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. Any person who is being subjected to discrimination on the basis of disability in violation of the Act or this part or who has reasonable grounds for believing that such person is about to be subjected to discrimination in violation of section 303 of the Act or subpart D of this part may institute a civil action for preventive relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order. Upon timely application, the court may, in its discretion, permit the Attorney General to intervene in the civil action if the Attorney General or his or her designee certifies that the case is of general public importance. Upon application by the complainant and in such circumstances as the court may deem just, the court may appoint an attorney for such complainant and may authorize the commencement of the civil action without the payment of fees, costs, or security. Nothing in this section shall require a person with a disability to engage in a futile gesture if the person has actual notice that a person or organization covered by title III of the Act or this part does not intend to comply with its provisions.

(b) Injunctive relief. In the case of violations of § 36.304, §§ 36.308, 36.310(b), 36.401, 36.402, 36.403, and 36.405 of this part, injunctive relief shall include an order to alter facilities to make such facilities readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities to the extent required by the Act or this part. Where appropriate, injunctive relief shall also include requiring the provision of an auxiliary aid or service, modification of a policy, or provision of alternative methods, to the extent required by the Act or this part.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1995–2024 · leading case: Laufer v. Acheson Hotels, LLC, 50 F.4th 259 (1st Cir. 2022).
Laufer v. Acheson Hotels, LLC, 50 F.4th 259 (1st Cir. 2022). · cites it 4× “§ 12188 (a); 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 . C. And that's what Laufer did.”
Deborah Laufer v. Arpan LLC, 29 F.4th 1268 (11th Cir. 2022). “5 5 Because Laufer sued (at least in part) under an Attorney-General-promul- gated regulation, see 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 (a), one might argue that Congress properly authorized the Executive Branch to enforce Title III of the ADA, see 42 U.”
Schroedel v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 885 F. Supp. 594 (S.D.N.Y. 1995). · cites it 2× “Schroedel argues that she has standing to seek injunctive relief by virtue of 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 , which provides: Any person who is being subjected to discrimination on the basis of disability in violation of the [ADA] .”
Grove v. De La Cruz, 407 F. Supp. 2d 1126 (C.D. Cal. 2005). “§ 12188 (a)(1); 28 C.F.R. §§ 36.501 , 36.505. In the present case, plaintiff seeks an order from the Court directing De La Cruz defendants to install grab bars in the women’s restroom.”
Johnson v. Wayside Prop., Inc., 41 F. Supp. 3d 973 (E.D. Cal. 2014). “§ 12188 (a); 28 C.F.R. §§ 36.501 , 36.505; Antoninetti v.”
Asselin v. Shawnee Mission Med. Ctr., Inc., 894 F. Supp. 1479 (D. Kan. 1995). · cites it 2× “Motion For Possible Intervention Plaintiff argues that this case is of “general public importance” and asks the court’s “instant permission” for the United States Department of Justice to intervene on his behalf under 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 et seq. SMMC correctly notes that under 28…”
Resnick v. Magical Cruise Co., Ltd., 148 F. Supp. 2d 1298 (M.D. Fla. 2001). “§ 12188 (a)(1) (emphasis added); see also 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 (a) (same). A plaintiff may have “actual notice” under this provision by either having “encountered discrimination or [having] learned of the alleged violations through expert findings or personal observation.”
Scharffenberger v. Kirkland (In Re Allegheny Health, Educ. & Rsch. Found.), 321 B.R. 776 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2005). “Kirkland contends that MCP violated the Rehabilitation Act by virtue of the same alleged conduct of MCP towards her that, as described above, she maintains was violative of the ADA.”
Macort v. Goodwill Indus.-Manasota, Inc., 220 F.R.D. 377 (M.D. Fla. 2003). · cites it 2× “§ 12188 (a)(1); 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 (a)(same), which allow private citizens with disabilities to initiate civil actions for preventative relief under the ADA when such individuals have suffered from discrimination, or believe that they will be discriminated against based upon…”
Defrees v. West, 988 F. Supp. 1390 (D. Kan. 1997). · cites it 3× “’ Defendant asks the court to dismiss plaintiffs complaint, arguing that the Rehabilitation Act provides the exclusive remedy for a federal employee’s claim of disability discrimination.”
Deck v. Am. Hawaii Cruises, Inc., 121 F. Supp. 2d 1292 (D. Haw. 2000). “§ 12188 (a)(1); 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 ; 28 C.F.R. § 36.504 .”
Howard Ex Rel. Howard v. Cherry Hills Cutters, Inc., 935 F. Supp. 1148 (D. Colo. 1996). “§§ 12188 and 2000a-3, 28 C.F.R. § 36.501 (governing “Private Suits” under 42 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.