[blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008

[ckrugman at sbcglobal.net]

While medical records can carry some weight the idea is to get away from 
defining disability according to the medical model as it excludes people who 
may have long standing existing disabling conditions where they may not be 
under the care of a doctor. I personally had a difficulty with thiswhen 
several years ago I was required to furnish proof of blindness for a 
disabled transit pass. As my blindness was congenital and I did not have a 
regular doctor this process was a bit difficult. At that time I was 
receiving SSDI benefits and they accepted the fact that I was receiving 
Medicare as proof of disability. With our health care delivery system the 
way it is there are many people that do not have a regular doctor that can 
cater to these requests. Another attempt to get away from this model was the 
implementation several years ago of "functional job analysis" which measures 
the difficulty that a person has performing basic functions, e.g. seeing, 
walking standing, etc. Chuck
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark BurningHawk" <stone_troll at sbcglobal.net>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:30 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and 
Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008


> Okay, but he still needs a screen-reader.  No martial art  know of will 
> let you read a screen. *grin*  And he reads Braille as well.  So maybe 
> that would be enough to define him as disabled--still, seems rather 
> arbitrary to base disability on accommodation rather than scientific 
> evidence like medical records or whatever.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 3:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance 
> series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008
>
>
>> Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled 
>> that they use repeatedely.
>> Chuck
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Mark BurningHawk" <stone_troll at sbcglobal.net>
>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM
>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: 
>> TheADAAmendments Act of 2008
>>
>>
>>> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is 
>>> considered disabled?
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: <ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>; 
>>> <fdra at yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM
>>> Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The 
>>> ADAAmendments Act of 2008
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM
>>>> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 
>>>> 2008
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008
>>>>
>>>>    READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES!
>>>>
>>>> BACKGROUND
>>>> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 
>>>> Amendments Act
>>>> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the
>>>> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes 
>>>> apply
>>>> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that 
>>>> these
>>>> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of
>>>> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the 
>>>> challenge
>>>> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be 
>>>> covered as
>>>> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any 
>>>> court
>>>> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments 
>>>> Act
>>>> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what 
>>>> we
>>>> know so far.
>>>>
>>>> OVERALL PURPOSE
>>>> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out 
>>>> the
>>>> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national 
>>>> mandate
>>>> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent,
>>>> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad
>>>> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the
>>>> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, 
>>>> if
>>>> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being 
>>>> protected
>>>> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the 
>>>> definition
>>>> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more
>>>> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the 
>>>> question
>>>> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the 
>>>> focus
>>>> will be on whether discrimination occurred.
>>>>
>>>> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY
>>>> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same
>>>>
>>>> Definition: Disability.
>>>> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an
>>>> individual-- 
>>>> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or 
>>>> more
>>>> major life activities of such individual;
>>>> (B) a record of such an impairment; or
>>>> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment."
>>>>
>>>> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - 
>>>> the
>>>> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the 
>>>> meaning of
>>>> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to 
>>>> be
>>>> applied to individuals.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard
>>>>
>>>> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations.
>>>> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment
>>>> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations
>>>> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them 
>>>> consistent
>>>> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined
>>>> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said 
>>>> that
>>>> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to 
>>>> meet. The
>>>> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC 
>>>> and
>>>> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise
>>>> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st
>>>> effective date.
>>>>
>>>> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the
>>>> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet 
>>>> and
>>>> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know?
>>>>
>>>> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered
>>>>
>>>> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As:
>>>> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision
>>>> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses),
>>>> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear 
>>>> implants
>>>> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen 
>>>> therapy
>>>> equipment and supplies;
>>>> (II) use of assistive technology;
>>>> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or
>>>> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications.
>>>>
>>>> Except:
>>>> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary
>>>> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether 
>>>> an
>>>> impairment substantially limits a major life activity."
>>>>
>>>> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is
>>>> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the 
>>>> beneficial
>>>> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact 
>>>> lens.
>>>> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not
>>>> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people 
>>>> not
>>>> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy,
>>>> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through 
>>>> measures
>>>> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme 
>>>> Court
>>>> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of
>>>> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that 
>>>> many of
>>>> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition.  The Amendments 
>>>> Act
>>>> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating
>>>> measures.
>>>>
>>>> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her
>>>> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new
>>>> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations 
>>>> would
>>>> be without her medication.
>>>>
>>>> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative
>>>> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating 
>>>> measure
>>>> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered.
>>>>
>>>> Now we know:
>>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; 
>>>> and
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore 
>>>> the
>>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary 
>>>> eyeglasses
>>>> and contact lens) the person uses.
>>>>
>>>> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions
>>>>
>>>> Definition: Major Life Activities.
>>>> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities
>>>> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual
>>>> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting,
>>>> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, 
>>>> thinking,
>>>> communicating, and working.
>>>> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major 
>>>> life
>>>> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, 
>>>> including
>>>> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth,
>>>> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, 
>>>> circulatory,
>>>> endocrine, and reproductive functions."
>>>>
>>>> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered
>>>> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing
>>>> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected
>>>> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as 
>>>> gastrointestinal
>>>> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect
>>>> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts
>>>> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life
>>>> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically
>>>> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major 
>>>> life
>>>> activities.
>>>>
>>>> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely 
>>>> be
>>>> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability 
>>>> because we
>>>> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and 
>>>> because
>>>> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life
>>>> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states 
>>>> is
>>>> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity 
>>>> need
>>>> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a
>>>> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major 
>>>> life
>>>> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the
>>>> activities that can be considered.
>>>>
>>>> Now we know:
>>>>
>>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was;
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore 
>>>> the
>>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary 
>>>> eyeglasses
>>>> and contact lens) the person uses; and
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major 
>>>> life
>>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life
>>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is
>>>> enough.
>>>>
>>>> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If 
>>>> Active
>>>>
>>>> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose 
>>>> limitations
>>>> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how 
>>>> long
>>>> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a 
>>>> person
>>>> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to 
>>>> accommodations
>>>> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet 
>>>> the
>>>> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the 
>>>> Amendments
>>>> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is 
>>>> a
>>>> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when
>>>> active."
>>>>
>>>> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups 
>>>> that
>>>> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of 
>>>> the
>>>> new definition of disability because we will consider what his 
>>>> limitations
>>>> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be
>>>> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009.
>>>>
>>>> Now we know:
>>>>
>>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was;
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore 
>>>> the
>>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary 
>>>> eyeglasses
>>>> and contact lens) the person uses;
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major 
>>>> life
>>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life
>>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is
>>>> enough; and
>>>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in
>>>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we 
>>>> consider the
>>>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active 
>>>> state.
>>>>
>>>> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits 
>>>> Requirement
>>>>
>>>> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having 
>>>> such
>>>> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been
>>>> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual 
>>>> or
>>>> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment 
>>>> limits
>>>> or is perceived to limit a major life activity.
>>>> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and 
>>>> minor.
>>>> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected 
>>>> duration
>>>> of 6 months or less."
>>>>
>>>> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. 
>>>> To
>>>> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer
>>>> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he
>>>> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have 
>>>> to
>>>> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One
>>>> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory 
>>>> (lasting
>>>> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. 
>>>> Arguably,
>>>> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be 
>>>> covered.
>>>>
>>>> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely
>>>> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without 
>>>> looking at
>>>> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely 
>>>> be
>>>> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress 
>>>> broadened
>>>> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address 
>>>> the
>>>> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and
>>>> institutional barriers that still exist.
>>>>
>>>> Now we know:
>>>>
>>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was;
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore 
>>>> the
>>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary 
>>>> eyeglasses
>>>> and contact lens) the person uses;
>>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major 
>>>> life
>>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life
>>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is
>>>> enough;
>>>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in
>>>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we 
>>>> consider the
>>>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active 
>>>> state;
>>>> and
>>>> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the
>>>> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not
>>>> include impairments that are transitory and minor.
>>>>
>>>> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
>>>>
>>>> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable
>>>> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who 
>>>> meet
>>>> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts 
>>>> of
>>>> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only 
>>>> meet the
>>>> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even 
>>>> though the
>>>> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition 
>>>> of
>>>> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable
>>>> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for 
>>>> reasonable
>>>> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the
>>>> substantially limited major life activity that established that the 
>>>> employee
>>>> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that 
>>>> she
>>>> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell 
>>>> growth,
>>>> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions"
>>>> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is
>>>> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. 
>>>> Once the
>>>> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must
>>>> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a 
>>>> result of
>>>> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her 
>>>> disability.
>>>>
>>>> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the 
>>>> reasonable
>>>> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example:
>>>>
>>>> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not 
>>>> always
>>>> have to provide the requested accommodation,
>>>> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue 
>>>> hardship,
>>>> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal 
>>>> use
>>>> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job,
>>>> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is 
>>>> not
>>>> otherwise qualified for a position, and
>>>> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, 
>>>> or
>>>> lower production standards as an accommodation.
>>>> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable
>>>> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act:
>>>>
>>>> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at
>>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html
>>>>
>>>> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation
>>>> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at
>>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html
>>>>
>>>> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable
>>>> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at
>>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html
>>>>
>>>> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at
>>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html
>>>>
>>>> PRACTICAL TIPS
>>>>
>>>> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the 
>>>> EEOC
>>>> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that
>>>> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation
>>>> procedures.
>>>>
>>>> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with
>>>> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can 
>>>> no
>>>> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a
>>>> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using 
>>>> unnecessary
>>>> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, 
>>>> relying on
>>>> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a 
>>>> disability
>>>> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable
>>>> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for
>>>> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, 
>>>> and
>>>> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA.
>>>>
>>>> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation 
>>>> about
>>>> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN
>>>> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu.  JAN also 
>>>> offers
>>>> several publications for employers:
>>>>
>>>> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html
>>>>
>>>> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job
>>>> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc
>>>>
>>>> Five Practical Tips Webcast at 
>>>> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm
>>>>
>>>> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the 
>>>> Americans
>>>> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide
>>>>
>>>> 2. Focus on performance and conduct.
>>>>
>>>> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of
>>>> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One 
>>>> problem
>>>> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees'
>>>> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that 
>>>> decisions
>>>> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if
>>>> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus 
>>>> on
>>>> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their
>>>> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical 
>>>> problem or
>>>> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is 
>>>> the
>>>> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or
>>>> performance problem is disability-related and to request an 
>>>> accommodation to
>>>> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to 
>>>> bring
>>>> up medical issues first.
>>>>
>>>> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct
>>>> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at
>>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html
>>>>
>>>> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers.
>>>>
>>>> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their
>>>> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has 
>>>> the
>>>> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else,
>>>> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning 
>>>> medical
>>>> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to
>>>> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of 
>>>> their
>>>> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle
>>>> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help
>>>> avoid discriminatory employment decisions).
>>>>
>>>> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is 
>>>> to
>>>> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that
>>>> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation
>>>> request can be considered retaliation.
>>>>
>>>> 4. Document actions and decisions.
>>>>
>>>> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of
>>>> disability and toward whether employers complied with their 
>>>> obligations,
>>>> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an 
>>>> employee
>>>> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never 
>>>> looked
>>>> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of 
>>>> disability.
>>>> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of 
>>>> the
>>>> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated.
>>>> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be
>>>> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and 
>>>> written
>>>> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone.
>>>>
>>>> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication 
>>>> with
>>>> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees 
>>>> know,
>>>> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of 
>>>> their
>>>> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied.
>>>> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to 
>>>> address
>>>> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options.
>>>>
>>>> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link 
>>>> attachments:
>>>>
>>>> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm
>>>>
>>>> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent
>>>> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments.  Check your 
>>>> e-mail
>>>> security settings to determine how attachments are handled.
>>>> <<adaaa1.url>>
>>>>
>>>> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>>> blindlaw:
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> blindlaw:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net