Is this stoopid or what?? Court: Chipotle restaurant violated disability law

[JEDIYoda]

http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_15613391?source=rss

Court: Chipotle restaurant violated disability law

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — An appeals court has ruled that two Chipotle Mexican Grill restaurants in San Diego have violated a federal law protecting the rights of the disabled.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday that customers in wheelchairs are denied the "Chipotle experience" of watching their food being prepared because the restaurants' 45-inch counters are too high.

The company now faces hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages.

The unanimous three-judge ruling overturned a trial court decision pointing to Chipotle's willingness to prepare a disabled customer's order elsewhere. The appeals court said that is still unfair.

The ruling was issued on the 20th anniversary of passage of the American with Disabilities Act.



We all understand that the disabled need to have access to everything that those of us who are not disabled have.

Yet just because you cannot see your food being prepared that is IMO not a reason to sue........

 

[Genx87]

Is this from the Onion? I dont see how this would pass the Supreme Court. They have an option for these people. Even then I dont see how not providing the full experience because you are in a wheel chair at a fast food restaurant falls under the disability act.

 

[waggy]

I have said many times while the idea behind the law the reality is to many abuse it.

many lawyers find a disabled person willing to have these type of lawsuits put in there name then mass file them.

its fricken insane and i think does more to hurt disabled people then help them.

 

[Vette73]

This is the lowwer court 3 panel, not the full 9 judge panel. I really doubt this will hold up.

That and all they have to do is install the mirrors that cooking schools have so everybody can see what is going on.

 

[highland145]

Calicookia. 'Nuf said.

 

[OutHouse]

just a money grab. if chipolte lowered the prep area for ADA the workers would sue for disability for being hunched over all day.

 

[keird]

9th Circuit again, huh?

 

[irishScott]

As if I needed any more reason to not move to California...

 

[Amused]

Gawd I hate this fucking state. I was born and raised here, and left at 17. Now I've I retired back here for the nice weather, but every other damn thing about this shithole sucks

 

[MotF Bane]

How the hell do these idiots become judges?

 

[PeshakJang]

How the hell do these idiots become judges?

No no no, they aren't "idiots", they are "progressives". Progress... get it? It's right there in the name. This is progress.

 

[First]

That is pretty ludicrous just based on the article, but you have to figure there's more to the story, like not having access to the food at all somehow. It can't really be just preparing food, right? Right?!?!?!?!?

 

[woolfe9999]

How the hell do these idiots become judges?

Do you know the provisions of the law they are interpretting? Perhaps the problem is the law itself, as written, not the judges themselves.

I find it amusing that every time a ruling comes out that people don't like they blame the judges, as if there is no such thing as any "law" that judges are applying.

- wolf

 

[Daedalus685]

People sue too damn much...

gimme gimme gimme!!!!!

 

[woolfe9999]

I have said many times while the idea behind the law the reality is to many abuse it.

many lawyers find a disabled person willing to have these type of lawsuits put in there name then mass file them.

its fricken insane and i think does more to hurt disabled people then help them.

This is absolutely true. I know it from professional experience. The trouble is often the plaintiff's lawyers. They have stock disabled "plaintiffs" they use for all these cases. They often use the same plaintiffs over and over again. They will have these plaintiffs go to a restaurant with the entire thing pre-planned. They will then generate a civil complaint with cooky cutter allegations, often a cut and paste from prior complaints they have filed. The law itself (ADA) is very slanted toward the plaintiffs. They basically cannot lose if there is even a single code violation in the restaurant, which there almost always is. The ADA allows the winning party to collect attorney's fees. Typically, they will settle these cases with the resaurant's insurance carrier early on, without putting much time into them. The attorney will claim an outlandish fee (like $80,000 for 20 hours of work). The attorney will take 95% of the settlement, and the plaintiffs will cut their "cut," typically $5 grand per case. Then it's on to the next case. It's like an assembly line.

- wolf

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

9th Circuit...go figure.

 

[Slew Foot]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

[Vette73]

AND!!! the rest of the story...

http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=infco20100726135

 

[heyheybooboo]

The counter-top height thing does seem silly, but it looks as if the district court screwed up a lot more than that: AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED

""Injunctive relief is the sole remedy available to private parties under the Disabilities Act; it does not authorize a claim for money damages.....The district court denied an injunction"" and awarded monetary damages.

So this deal is messed up all over the place.





--

 

[BoberFett]

Here's the key, as others have mentioned.

3. Held that Antoninetti was a prevailing party in the litigation, and awarded him attorney's fees of $136,537.83-considerably less than he had sought; and

 

[shira]

I've gone to Chipotle numerous times, and an issue that isn't specifically mentioned in these articles is that being able to watch your food being "put together" helps to ensure that the Chipotle staffer isn't making a mistake (for example, putting the wrong salsa or unwanted sour cream in your burrito or failing to add guacamole). Periodically, I catch them about to do something wrong. So being able to watch them prepare the food is a good thing, and it's not quite so trivial as merely being able to "enjoy the food-watching experience."

 

[Genx87]

I've gone to Chipotle numerous times, and an issue that isn't specifically mentioned in these articles is that being able to watch your food being "put together" helps to ensure that the Chipotle staffer isn't making a mistake (for example, putting the wrong salsa or unwanted sour cream in your burrito or failing to add guacamole). Periodically, I catch them about to do something wrong. So being able to watch them prepare the food is a good thing, and it's not quite so trivial as merely being able to "enjoy the food-watching experience."

What other food establishment allows one to watch food prep? Are you saying this is a safety issue? Or are you saying that since they cant see it isnt legal?

 

[sandorski]

Here's the key, as others have mentioned.

ahhhh, to be a Lawyer...

 

[rudder]

There are many disabled people in California (and lawyers who support them) who make an excellent living suing businesses under the ADA law.

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091104/A_NEWS0803/911040309/-1/A_NEWS

just a quick google link... but many more stories like this.

 

[Dekasa]

I've gone to Chipotle numerous times, and an issue that isn't specifically mentioned in these articles is that being able to watch your food being "put together" helps to ensure that the Chipotle staffer isn't making a mistake (for example, putting the wrong salsa or unwanted sour cream in your burrito or failing to add guacamole). Periodically, I catch them about to do something wrong. So being able to watch them prepare the food is a good thing, and it's not quite so trivial as merely being able to "enjoy the food-watching experience."

$20 says if you walk back to the counter and say that they added sour cream when you didn't want it, they'll make you a new burrito, even if the employee is certain you asked for sour cream.