[nagdu] Taxicabs, Allergies, & Religion

[Marion Gwizdala]

Cindy,
    Cindy,
    Unless the condition of an allergy, or other medical condition rises to 
the level of a disability - something that is very rare as it relates to the 
presence of a dog - then such a justification is mute. If you were to file a 
complaint with the Department of Justice against this individual, you would 
first be required to prove that you are a member of the class of individuals 
protected by the ADA. In other words, you would need to prove that you are 
disabled. Likewise, the driver of the taxicab, if he truly has such an 
exemption, would be required to request a reasonable accommodation from his 
employer, as outlined in Title I of the ADA. If this were to have happened 
to me, I would contact the taxicab company and inquire if this person had 
actually requested a reasonable accommodation and what due diligence the 
company had employed to ascertain if this person is truly part of the class 
of individuals protected by the ADA.
    For everyone's information, I am attaching a legal opinion from the City 
Solicitor of Cincinnati, Ohio. It contains some specific information 
concerning allergies as a defense for carrying service dogs in a taxicab, 
including an affidavit from a medical expert in the field of allergies. I 
hope this information is helpful to you!

Fraternally yours,
Marion Gwizdala


From: "Cindy Ray" <cindyray at gmail.com>
To: "the National Association of Guide Dog Users NAGDU Mailing List" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 9:12 AM
Subject: [nagdu] Taxicabs Revisited


> Last night I had a really interesting experience. I do not call cabs and 
> tell the dispatcher that I have a dog with me; I do, however, believe that 
> they may have entered that fact into my computer at some point. So I 
> called a cab last night and the driver had driven  while before he said, 
> "The computer didn't say there would be a dog with you." I had forgotten 
> that the computer had at one time noted the dog, but my DH said so later. 
> I said that I don't announce that I have the dog with me because I am not 
> bound to do so. He said he has an asthma condition that makes him exempt 
> from hauling dogs, and I told him legally that wasn't an option. He told 
> me that he was the only driver in Des Moines with an exemption. He had 
> contacted "whoever is in charge of ADA" and explained this asthmatic 
> problem and had been able to get exempted from hauling dogs. If he come, 
> he said, he has to see to it that you get another driver. Well, fine, but 
> I would have been later than I was. But then he said,
> "I take dogs anyway because if it is a day when I am having that much 
> trouble with the asthma, I am not driving anyway." So what was that? He 
> says he's exempt because of the asthma but he hauls dogs anyway; can't 
> have it both ways, I say, and I'm thinking to investigate this because I 
> think he's full of *IT*. Does anyone believe he can actually do this. I 
> didn't continue arguing the point because I didn't have enough amunition 
> with me at that moment to do so and, after all, he hadn't denied me the 
> ride. Also, he did not pass out because of the oxygen problems created by 
> Fisher being in the car. So, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
>
> Cindy Lou
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%40verizon.net 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: taxicabs - Allergies & Religion Legal Opinion.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 62464 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nagdu_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120413/793e4c9f/attachment.doc>