Florida Federal Judge Finds Disney's Accommodation To Autistic Park Patron Satisfied ADA Requirements
May 5, 2016 - Plaintiff D.L., mother of minor A.L., claimed that A.L.’s moderate to severe autism rendered him incapable of deviation from routine. One such example was his visiting amusement parks, which required travel in only one direction and stopping at only some places in the same order every time. Failure to follow such routines and having wait times would result in a “meltdown” including humming, making random noises, striking out, flailing arms and/or hitting himself. On past visits to defendant Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., defendant would provide a Guest Assistance Card (GAC). GACs would allow disabled patrons and a limited number of guests to access “Fastpass” lines at attractions or enter attractions through alternative, backdoor entrances. However, defendant subsequently abandoned use of the GAC system because of alleged abuse both by guests that needed the GACs and those that did not. The Disney Disability Access Service (DAS) was created to replace the GAC system. With a DAS, guests with disabilities such as autism are able to “virtually wait” for attractions without standing in lines, returning at a designated time. Additionally, some guests would receive a number of passes allowing them to enter a Fastpass line for any attraction without having to stand in line or wait virtually. On a Dec. 19, 2013, visit to Disney, plaintiff and his family found the virtual wait to be unacceptable.
Numerous individuals with disabilities originally filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, which was transferred to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on Sept. 26, 2014. Plaintiff claimed that defendant’s replacement of the GAS with the DAS system violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate his disability. The suit, which was originally filed in California, was later moved to the Middle District of Florida and split into several suits. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on Oct. 30, 2015, arguing that the accommodation was not “necessary” as required by the ADA as demonstrated by the fact that plaintiff had changed his route three time on his last Disney visit and had traveled from Florida to both Cancun and North Carolina. Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, or alternatively for partial summary judgment, on Nov. 10, 2015, arguing that defendant did not provide an individualized assessment of plaintiff’s needs.
The court granted summary judgment for defendant, finding that defendant provided a sufficiently individualized assessment of plaintiff’s needs and his requested accommodation was not necessary. The court held that reversion to the GAC system was not necessary for plaintiff to have equal access to defendant’s parks because plaintiff was offered an opportunity to experience the park in a similar or better manner as non-disabled guests. Additionally, the court found that the ADA did not require defendant to accommodate plaintiff’s preference to visit its park attractions in a specific order. Plaintiff’s testimony regarding his last visit to the park on Dec. 19, 2013, after the DAS system was put in place, also showed that he was able to depart from a specific route and that he could have waited the short time it would have taken to access his preferred rides using the DAS system. For more information on this case, the full summary can be viewed at A.L., by and through D.L. as Next Friend, Parent, and Natural Guardian, v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, U.S., Inc; 2016 Jury Verdicts LEXIS 2700.