[nagdu] Woman with guide dog says civil rights were violated

[Angie Matney]

Hi Marion,

Yes, it would depend on the judge's interpretation of the law. But the
example you cited regarding a taxi company is very different than a law that
would contain the words "seeing eye." I really do not believe an attorney
could win a case with only the "seeing-eye" argument. 

Best,

Angie



-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Marion & Martin
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 5:09 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Woman with guide dog says civil rights were violated

Angie,
    You have stated what I meant by my comments. As for whether or not an 
attorney could win on this technicality might be up to a judge. we have a 
case currently in the works in Florida in which the State Attorney will not 
file charges against a private taxi company that has denied access to two 
blind people. The SA is arguing that the taxi company has the right to 
refuse access to anyone for any reason and that, as a private company, it is

not a "public accommodation". The Attorney General's office is intervening 
for us on this question. I offer this example as one of a technicality that 
may cause even someone who should be a legal advocate for the public as one 
who is interpreting the law too narrowly and, in my opinion, incorrectly.

Fraternally,
Marion

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Angie Matney" <angie.matney at gmail.com>
To: "'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Woman with guide dog says civil rights were violated


> Hi Jenine,
>
> I could be wrong, but I think Marion was talking about a possible criminal
> case. I think he was suggesting that an attorney might argue that an 
> access
> denial was not a crime if it didn't happen to a team from The Seeing Eye.
> (Having said that, I don't remember if Texas has criminal access-denial
> statutes or not.) In a criminal case, the ADA terminology wouldn't matter,
> but as I said in my other email, I don't think an attorney could win an
> argument on a technicality like that.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
> Of Jenine Stanley
> Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 11:00 AM
> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Woman with guide dog says civil rights were violated
>
> Interesting logic, Marion, but federal law trumps state and local laws and
> there's no such mention of the term "Seeing eye" in the ADA. Now I suppose
> if a person just stuck with remedies provided under state law or local law
> and such a term was still in place then it would matter, but hopefully a
> good attorney could also argue against it as well as for it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/angie.matney%40gmail.
> com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizo
n.net 


_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/angie.matney%40gmail.
com